Ligonier Ministries Blog

Resurrection Now and Not Yet — The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology

2012-05-20T17:12:53Z

One of John's few explicitly eschatological passages is found in chapter 5. The occasion is the healing of an lame man at the pool of Bethesda on a Sabbath. Because Jesus heals the man on a Sabbath, the Jews persecute him (5:16). Jesus then says to them, "My Father is working until now, and I am working" (v. 17). The response infuriates the Jewish leaders even more because "not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God" (v. 18). Jesus then says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel" (vv. 19–20). As Barrett explains, Jesus' point here is that he is what he is "only in humble obedience to and complete dependence upon the Father."ⁱ

Jesus then says, "For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father" (vv. 21–23). While the Father is the source of life and judgment, he has delegated to the Son the authority to raise the dead and to judge. Jesus continues, "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life" (v. 24). Carson rightly observes, that this "is perhaps the strongest affirmation of inaugurated eschatology in the Fourth Gospel"ⁱⁱ The emphasis here is clearly on that which is already true of the believer. He already has eternal life. He has already passed from death to life. In other words, he has already been spiritually resurrected.

Spiritual resurrection is the subject of the following verse, as Jesus continues his discourse, "Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live" (v. 25). The coming "hour" is the eschatological future age. However, because the Messiah who raises the dead is now here, the eschatological age has already been inaugurated.ⁱⁱⁱ Jesus says that hour is coming "and now is" (kai nun estin). He is referring, therefore, to the life that is given now to the spiritually dead. Barrett explains, "That the dead referred to in this verse are not the physically dead is confirmed by the fact that they are not (like those of v. 28) said to be in the tombs; the aorist participle suggests those who at the time of writing have been vivified by the word of Christ."^iv The resurrection life of the future age reaches back into the present and is available now to the spiritually dead.^v Believers now receive a foretaste of the resurrection life that they will experience in fullness on the last day.

Jesus says, "For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man" (vv. 26–27). Here there is a possible allusion to Daniel 7:13–14, the Old Testament prophecy in which all authority is given to the Son of Man. Jesus continues, "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment" (vv. 28–29). Unlike verse 25, which speaks of present spiritual resurrection, verses 28–29 speak of the future bodily resurrection of the dead.^vi

It is important to note, as Keener explains, that the future form of verse 28 ("an hour is coming") does not include the present ("and is now here") that is found in verse 25. In other words, John does not teach a completely realized eschatology.^vii Beasley-Murray helpfully summarizes the teaching of these verses:

The spiritually dead who "hear" the voice of the Son of God in the days of their flesh and are raised by him to life will hear that voice again, calling them to enter upon the fullness of resurrection life for the kingdom of glory. Similarly those who are deaf to the voice of the Son of God in life must in the end respond to that voice, and rise to hear the word of condemnation pronounced upon them.^viii

The relationship between present and future eschatology is nowhere more intricately connected than it is here in these verses. The resurrection life of the age to come is experienced in part now by believers. They are no longer spiritually dead. Their bodies, however, will die. But on the last day, they will experience the fullness of resurrection life when the voice of God calls them from the grave and their corruptible bodies are raised incorruptible (cf. 1 Cor. 15:35–49).

ⁱ C.K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St John (London: SPCK, 1960), 214.
ⁱⁱ D.A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 256; cf. George R. Beasley-Murray, John, 2d ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 76.
ⁱⁱⁱ Cf. Beasley-Murray, John, 76.
^iv Barrett, Gospel According to St John, 218.
^v Cf. George E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 341; Carson, Gospel According to John, 256.
^vi Barrett, Gospel According to St John, 219; Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John I-XII (New York: Doubleday, 1966), 218–21; F.F. Bruce, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 131–33; Carson, Gospel According to John, 258.
^vii Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 1:654–55.
^viii Beasley-Murray, John, 77.

Adapted from From Age to Age by Keith Mathison. ISBN 978-0-87552-745-1
Used with permission of P&R Publishing Co. P O Box 817, Phillipsburg N.J. 08865 www.prpbooks.com

From Age to Age is available in the Ligonier store.

Twitter Highlights (5/20/12)

2012-05-20T20:06:05Z

Here are highlights from our various Twitter accounts over the past week.

The church desperately needs men who are proclaimers of the full counsel of Scripture. —Steven Lawson
— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 16, 2012

Resolved, when I feel pain, to think of the pains of martyrdom, and of hell (Edwards, Resolution 10)
— Tabletalk Magazine (@Tabletalk) May 16, 2012

Feed My Sheep — 99ç eBook Sale: "It is spiritually challenging & topically pertinent." —@LigonDuncan ligm.in/JFoTrV #ePub #Kindle
— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 16, 2012

Believers are justified for the purpose of worshiping God in holiness of life. —Joel Beeke bit.ly/J5XhZN
— Reformation Trust (@RefTrust) May 16, 2012

We cannot be certain that a thing is right because it is old, for Satan is old, sin is old, death is old, and hell is old (Spurgeon).
— Ligonier Academy (@LigonierAcademy) May 17, 2012

...outside of Christ there may be biological life, but there is no ultimate life—there is only spiritual death. —R.C. Sproul
— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 19, 2012

The passion of Christ was not the result of human contingency...The cup was prepared, delivered, and administered by almighty God —RC Sproul
— Reformation Trust (@RefTrust) May 19, 2012

You can also find our various ministries on Facebook:

Ligonier Ministries | Ligonier Academy | Ligonier Connect
Reformation Bible College | Reformation Trust | Tabletalk Magazine

I Have Friends

2012-04-26T16:23:24Z

It was, I suspect, somewhat early on in the growth of the "accountability" movement. I had heard the concept, but had not given it much study. The deacon at the church I attended as a young married man apparently had studied it. And so, seemingly with the approval of the session, he sat perched by the entrance of the sanctuary. He asked me, as he asked everyone passing by, with all the tact and enthusiasm of a carnival barker, if I had an accountability group. Being young and naïve I stopped and asked, "What's that?"

"Well," he explained, "it's a group of men who are active in your life, that care for you enough to challenge you when you fall into sin. They watch out for you, support you, encourage you to grow in grace and wisdom." "In that case," I retorted, "I do have an accountability group. It's just that I call them my friends."

Twenty years later I find myself having the same kind of conversation. When people find about the loss of my wife, they suggest that I find myself a group, Though I seek to mask my skepticism, it apparently shows through. "Really," folks tell me," you need people that you can talk to, that you can be real with. You need people you can count on to be there for you." The answer is the same. I understand the need. And it is well met in my life, by my friends.

Now I have nothing against accountability, nor accountability groups. I am positively in favor of grieving, and have nothing against groups built around that theme. What puzzles me on both counts, however, is how we have lost what is natural, and sought to replace it with programs. What does it say about the culture, both inside and outside the church, that callings normally born by friends now are met by something so artificial, so inorganic. These groups strike me as the emotional equivalent of a multivitamin. Sure enough many of us are not getting enough vitamin D or zinc in our diets. But isn't eating a few more veggies a better way to solve the problem?

Institutional solutions to relational problems at least do this for us- they expose our relational weaknesses. If our lifestyles make healthy meals a challenge, we need to change our lifestyles. If the transience and cyber-ness of our relationships make, well, friendship, a problem we need to change how we relate. We need to love near, and serve near.

And if, on the other hand, we have healthy relationships- real, personal relationships where we encourage one another toward righteousness, where we are free to be ourselves, where we talk with depth, and love with sincerity, we yet have this to do- we need to give thanks. We need not create a gratitude committee at our local church to create a gratitude program. No, we need to give thanks. So here I do. I have friends and family that love and care for me and my children. They check up on me. They look me in the eye when they talk to me. They hug me when they see me. They tell me they love me, and joyfully receive my love in return. They mourn when I mourn, as I rejoice when they rejoice. And I pray that they know that I give thanks to Him for them. I have friends, more and better than I deserve.

Christian Graduates Need a Christian Worldview

2012-05-17T15:34:33Z

Families are rejoicing across America as their sons and daughters are graduating and looking forward to college. Sadly, not every graduate will go to college with a fully formed Christian worldview. In addition to the temptations of the world, they will face, possibly for the first time, direct challenges to their faith.

Watch Christian Worldview for Free

To help ensure that today's graduates have a Biblical framework to interpret reality and answer life's ultimate questions, Dr. R.C. Sproul's teaching series, Christian Worldview, will be available to watch online for free until the end of June.

Specials to Buy the Series

If you would like to buy this series as a graduation gift, it is currently on sale:

Until the end of June, buy the series on DVD for 50% off

Other Resources for the Christian Graduate

If you're looking for other graduation gifts, we recommend the following:

1 year subscription to Tabletalk
Thriving at College by Alex Chediak (Book)

You can watch Alex discuss his book here.
The Reformation Study Bible (ESV)
Keeping in Step with the Holy Spirit by R.C. Sproul (Teaching Series)

General and Special Revelation — A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture

2012-05-16T11:52:33Z

In this series of blog posts, we have been discussing Dr. R.C. Sproul's answer to a question about the age of the universe during the Q&A at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference. In the previous post, we stopped in the middle of his answer to discuss his assertion: All Truth is God's Truth. Following this statement, Dr. Sproul continued by making a very important point about general and special revelation. He said:

I believe firmly that all of truth is God's truth, and I believe that God has not only given revelation in sacred Scripture, but also, the sacred Scripture itself tells us that God reveals Himself in nature—which we call natural revelation. And, I once asked a seminary class of mine that was a conservative group, I said, "How many of you believe that God's revelation in Scripture is infallible?" And they all raised their hand. And I said, "And how many of you believe that God's revelation in nature is infallible, and nobody raised their hand. It's the same God who's giving the revelation.

A Reformed approach to science and Scripture requires a Reformed understanding of revelation. The word "revelation" denotes a "revealing." In Christian theology, it refers to God's act of communication to man or to the content of that communication. Historically theologians have distinguished between different kinds of revelation. Many medieval theologians described the difference using the terms natural and supernatural revelation. The distinction had nothing to do with the source or origin of the revelation. Theologians who made this distinction believed that all revelation was supernatural in origin because God was its source. Instead, this distinction had to do with the mode of revelation. Natural revelation was communicated by God through so-called "natural" phenomena (His created works), while supernatural revelation was communicated by God through special divine intervention (dreams, visions, etc.).

General Revelation

A more common distinction among Reformed theologians is the distinction between general revelation and special revelation. Article 2 of the Belgic Confession (on the means by which we know God) states the distinction in the following words:

We know Him by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe; which is before our eyes as a most elegant book, wherein all creatures, great and small, are as so many characters leading us to see clearly the invisible things of God, even his everlasting power and divinity, as the apostle Paul says in Romans 1:20. All which things are sufficient to convince men and leave them without excuse. Second, He makes Himself more clearly and fully known to us by His holy and divine Word, that is to say, as far as is necessary for us to know in this life, to His glory and our salvation.

This distinction between general and special revelation focuses more on the extent and purpose of revelation.ⁱ General revelation is referred to as "general" revelation because it has a general content and is revealed to a general audience. Through general revelation to all men, God communicates His existence, His power, and His glory, such that men are left without excuse.

A further distinction that must be made is the distinction between immediate and mediate general revelation. Immediate general revelation occurs without an intermediating agency. Mediate general revelation occurs through an intermediating agency. John Calvin described immediate general revelation in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:

There is within the human mind, and indeed by natural instinct, an awareness of divinity [divinitatis sensum]. This we take to be beyond controversy. To prevent anyone from taking refuge in the pretense of ignorance, God himself has implanted in all men a certain understanding of his divine majesty (I.3.1).

In other words, God has revealed himself by directly implanting knowledge about Himself in all men. In a later chapter, Calvin described the mediate general revelation that God accomplishes through His created works:

The final goal of the blessed life, moreover, rests in the knowledge of God [cf. John 17:3]. Lest anyone, then, be excluded from access to happiness, he not only sowed in men's minds that seed of religion of which we have spoken, but revealed himself and daily discloses himself in the whole workmanship of the universe. As a consequence, men cannot open their eyes without being compelled to see him (Institutes, I.5.1).

God, then, reveals Himself through His works. Here, Calvin is simply restating what the Psalmist said in Psalm 19:1–2.

The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
Day to day pours out speech,
and night to night reveals knowledge.

The Apostle Paul elaborates on the same idea in Romans 1:19–20.

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

As John Murray explains, "We must not tone down the teaching of the apostle in this passage. It is a clear declaration to the effect that the visible creation as God's handiwork makes manifest the invisible perfections of God as its Creator, that from the things which are perceptible to the senses cognition of these invisible perfections is derived, and that thus a clear apprehension of God's perfections may be gained from his observable handiwork."ⁱⁱ

Special Revelation

General revelation, whether immediate or mediate, is directed to all men. It is, however, "not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of His will, which is necessary unto salvation" (Westminster Confession of Faith, I.1). General revelation does not reveal Jesus Christ or His work of redemption for sinners. Thus there is a need for what is called "special revelation." Special revelation is the revelation of the way of salvation.

One of the most important biblical texts describing God's special revelation is found in Hebrews 1:1–2, which reads:

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

In times past, before the completion of Scripture, God revealed His redemptive work through the prophets by means of dreams, visions, and theophanies. But now, special revelation has received its permanent form in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (WCF I.1).

Given this summary overview of the nature of general and special revelation, we return to the question Dr. Sproul asked his seminary class. Recall that he asked: "How many of you believe that God's revelation in Scripture is infallible?" And they all raised their hand. Then Dr. Sproul asked, "And how many of you believe that God's revelation in nature is infallible?" And this time no one raised their hand. As we will see in our next post, the reason for the different responses had to do with the students' right concern to recognize that Scripture is a higher authority than scientific theories. That, however, was not what Dr. Sproul asked. And therein lies the rub in many contemporary discussions of this issue. We end up talking past each other because we are not listening carefully. Dr. Sproul asked his students a question regarding something God does. And despite the misgivings of his students, the answer Dr. Sproul gave is correct. God's revelation in creation is equally as infallible as His revelation in Scripture because in both cases, it is God who is doing the revealing, and God is always infallible. God cannot err in His work of revealing Himself. The question the students thought Dr. Sproul was asking is an extremely important question, but it cannot be answered adequately until Dr. Sproul's original question is answered correctly.

In our next post, we will examine what may be the most important point Dr. Sproul raised in connection with the contemporary discussions, and that is the difference between God's infallible revelation (general and special) and our fallible interpretation of that revelation (general and special). In connection with this topic, we will need to look at Dr. Sproul's commentary on Article 12 of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy in order to understand the difference between scientific theories that contradict an interpretation of Scripture as opposed to theories that contradict an actual teaching of Scripture.

ⁱLouis Berkhof, Introduction to Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1932), 128).
ⁱⁱJohn Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968), 40.

$5 Friday: Apologetics, Suffering, & Theology

2012-05-17T19:38:48Z

This week's $5 Friday sale has resources that cover such topics as apologetics, suffering, theology, worldviews, God's promises, and more. Thanks to Reformation Heritage Books for partnering with us this week.

Sale runs through 12:01 a.m. — 11:59 p.m. Friday EST.

View today's $5 Friday sale items.

Someone is Wrong on the Internet

2012-05-14T14:20:16Z

Here's an excerpt from Someone is Wrong on the Internet, R.C. Sproul Jr.'s contribution to the May issue of Tabletalk.

It takes two to tango, and that doesn't even include the band. Our choices, our behaviors, are rarely as discreet as we think they are. Not only do our decisions bleed into our other decisions, they touch on other people's lives, more often than not. No man is an island; neither is any man a peninsula.

First, consider gossip. If gossip is spoken in the woods and no one hears, does it still make a mess? Guarding our tongues is important. But we need to guard our ears as well. Without an audience, gossip dies on the vine. It isn't gossip when I know something you don't. It isn't gossip when you find out what I knew first. It's only gossip when I get to be the one telling you. Ego and pride drive the tongue and open the ear.

The same is true of controversy. In the prototypical schoolyard fight, there is typically the victim, the bully, and the cowards. While we rightly cheer for the victim and hiss at the bully, the cowards, too, deserve our opprobrium. They haven't even the willingness to risk what the bully has, and worse still, they provide the audience he craves.

Continue reading Someone is Wrong on the Internet.

Feed My Sheep — 99¢ eBook Sale

2012-05-14T14:51:27Z

Our publishing imprint, Reformation Trust Publishing, was founded in 2006 and seeks to proclaim and explain the great truths of the historic Christian faith for a new generation. For a limited time, we'll be making select titles even more accessible as we lower their eBook price to 99¢.

We begin this month offering you Feed My Sheep: A Passion Plea for Preaching, a book Ligon Duncan commends to ministers, seminary students, and church members alike.

"There are a lot of books on preaching today, but not many good ones—this one is good. The subjects covered (and the accents of the authors as well) commend this volume to the minister and seminary student—and, indeed, to the church member who wants to learn what a real preaching ministry looks like, and who wants that for his church and from his pastor. It is spiritually challenging and topically pertinent."
—J. Ligon Duncan III
Senior Minister, First Presbyterian Church
Jackson, Miss.

In Feed My Sheep: A Passionate Plea for Preaching, an outstanding team of pastors, including Sinclair Ferguson, John MacArthur, Albert Mohler, John Piper, and R.C. Sproul say to the modern church: "Turn back!" Preaching is not just one of many acceptable methodologies that the church may employ as the cultural landscape changes. Rather, the preaching of God's Word is the biblically mandated method by which unbelievers are to be converted and churches built up in the faith.

Feed My Sheep is currently on sale for 99¢ as both an ePub from the Ligonier store or from Amazon's Kindle Store.

Biblical Calvinism Should Evoke a Passion for Lost Souls

2012-04-04T16:41:54Z

In the following excerpt from Steven Lawson's, The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon, we see in the life and ministry of Spurgeon the fruit biblical Calvinism should produce: a passion for lost souls.

May this serve as a reminder and an encouragement to our evangelistic fervor.

It is clear that Charles Spurgeon believed the gospel must not be calmly presented as a mere set of facts. To the contrary, it must come as a bold proclamation with open invitations, tender appeals, sound reasonings, and compelling persuasions. Such presentations should include even authoritative commands and severe warnings to obstinate hearts and minds. Spurgeon did not shrink from this task but gloried in it. He declared: "I do not envy Gabriel his crown when God gives me souls. I have thought that I would rather be here to talk with you and point you to my Master's cross than be up there and cast my crown at His feet. For surely there can be no joy in heaven greater than the joy of doing the Master's will in winning souls for Him." Spurgeon delighted in earnestly pursuing the salvation of lost sinners.

If I was saved by a simple gospel, then I am bound to preach that same simple gospel till I die... —Charles Spurgeon

A sermon that does not win souls, Spurgeon felt, is a waste of a preacher's energy: "When that which comes of his sowing is unfruitful, the sower's work is wasted; he has spent his strength for nought. Preaching is the idlest of occupations if the Word be not adapted to enter the heart and produce good results. O my hearers, if you are not converted, I waste time and energy in standing here!" Simply put, Spurgeon felt that preaching that did not lead to conversions was pointless.

It is not merely that Spurgeon desired to see people come to faith in Christ. Rather, he had to see lost sinners saved. He affirmed: "The fact is, brethren, we must have conversion work here. We cannot go on as some churches do without converts. We cannot, we will not, we must not, we dare not. Souls must be converted here, and if there be not many born to Christ, may the Lord grant to me that I may sleep in the tomb and be heard of no more. Better indeed for us to die than to live, if souls be not saved."

Better indeed for us to die than to live, if souls be not saved. —Charles Spurgeon

Elsewhere Spurgeon emphatically said: "If sinners will be damned, at least let them leap to hell over our bodies. And if they will perish, let them perish with our arms about their knees, imploring them to stay. If hell must be filled, at least let it be filled in the teeth of our exertions, and let not one go there unwarned and unprayed for." For Spurgeon, no exertion was too excessive for the rescue of a soul from damnation.

In his evangelism, Spurgeon's supreme motivation was sovereign grace: "That is why we preach! If there are so many fish to be taken in the net, I will go and catch some of them. Because many are ordained to be caught, I spread my nets with eager expectation. I never could see why that should repress our zealous efforts. It seems to me to be the very thing that should awaken us to energy—that God has a people, and that these people shall be brought in." Knowing that God had elected some to eternal life, Spurgeon was confident and passionate in his gospel appeals.

Spurgeon believed strongly in this evangelistic thrust. He saw it as his chief purpose in preaching: "If I was saved by a simple gospel, then I am bound to preach that same simple gospel till I die, so that others may be saved by it. When I cease to preach salvation by faith in Jesus, put me into a lunatic asylum, for you may be sure that my mind is gone." He remained faithful to this mission throughout his ministry.

Excerpt adapted from Steven Lawson's The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon. Available from ReformationTrust.com and now in the Kindle Store.

R.C. Sproul on the Other Comforter [VIDEO]

2012-05-15T10:02:46Z

In this excerpt from his teaching series, "What Did Jesus Do?", R.C. Sproul considers the meaning of the Greek word paraclete and the purpose of the Holy Spirit's coming at Pentecost.

Pray the Scriptures

2012-05-14T12:44:54Z

Here's an excerpt from Pray the Scriptures, Scotty Smith's contribution to the May issue of Tabletalk.

I am a recovering self-centered pragmatic pray-er — a believer who spent many of my first years in Christ thinking of God more as a sugar daddy than the sovereign Father. Prayer, for me, had more in common with programming a heavenly computer than surrendering to a loving Master. I worked harder at claiming God's promises for my ease than being claimed by God's purposes for His kingdom. Instead of being still and knowing that God is God, my prayer life was that of an antsy man, trying to help God be God.

Alas, this was a manifestation of the man-centered gospel that distorted my view of God and, therefore, enfeebled my practice of prayer. Thankfully, continued growth in grace has led me to a better understanding of the gospel, which, in turn, has radically reoriented my prayer life. It's not cliché; it's wondrously true: the gospel changes everything.

Nothing has been of greater importance to my growth in grace than learning to pray the Scriptures while wearing the lens of the gospel, and nothing has proven to be more fruitful.

Continue reading Pray the Scriptures.

Some Standing Here Will Not Taste Death — The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology

2012-05-11T17:08:18Z

From the point of Peter's confession onward, Jesus begins to teach his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem, suffer, be killed, and on the third day, be raised (16:21). Peter rebukes Jesus for saying this, but Jesus shows him that this is the only way (vv. 22–23). Jesus tells his disciples that they must take up their cross and follow him because it is foolish to gain the world and lose one's soul (vv. 24–26). Then Jesus says, "For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" (vv. 27–28).

Like Matthew 10:23, this text has also been the source of much debate. Davies and Allison survey some eight different interpretations that have been proposed.ⁱ Among the more prominent interpretations is the idea that "coming of the Son of Man" in view here is the transfiguration, which is narrated in the following chapter.ⁱⁱ Some suggest that Jesus is referring to his resurrection or to Pentecost. Others suggest that Jesus is referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.ⁱⁱⁱ Then there are those who believe Jesus is speaking here of his Second Coming and of the end of history. Among those holding this view, there are those who believe Jesus was mistaken because he believed this would occur within the lifetime of his hearers, and there are those who believe that Jesus was correct because the "some standing here" refers to a later generation.^iv

In order to come to an understanding of this saying, we must again be reminded that when Jesus speaks of the "coming of the Son of Man," he is purposefully alluding to Daniel 7:13–14. And again we must recall that the coming of the Son of Man in Daniel 7 is set within a judgment scene before the throne of God (cf. Dan. 7:9–10). Unlike the saying in Matthew 10:23, the saying in 16:28 is found in the immediate context of words regarding judgment (v. 27). The point that Jesus is making when he says that there are some standing here who will not die before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom is that there are some to whom he is speaking who will not die before the prophecy of Daniel 7 is fulfilled, in other words, before Jesus receives the kingdom from his Father.

A comparison of Matthew 16:28 with its parallels in Mark 9:1 and Luke 9:27 lends support to this interpretation. All three sayings are set within the same context immediately before the Transfiguration, yet whereas Matthew speaks of some living long enough to see the coming of the Son of Man, Mark and Luke speak of some living long enough to see the coming of the kingdom of God. The "coming of the Son of Man" then is simply another way of saying "the coming of the kingdom of God." It is the assumption that the words "coming of the Son of Man" must mean "Second Coming" that has caused much of the confusion. Once we realize that Jesus is simply using a phrase from Daniel 7 to allude to the whole prophecy, texts such as Matthew 16:28 are much more readily understood. Jesus was not predicting that his Second Coming would occur within the lifetime of some of his hearers. He wasn't speaking of the Second Coming at all.^v He was referring to the fulfillment of Daniel 7, his reception of the kingdom from the Father, and this was fulfilled within the lifetime of some of his hearers (cf. Matt. 28:18).^vi

As noted above, Matthew 16:28, unlike Matthew 10:23, is set within the context of a discussion of judgment. Verse 27 speaks of the Son of Man coming with angels and judging man. If the coming of the Son of Man in verse 28 is an allusion to Daniel's prophecy of one like a Son of Man coming up to the Ancient of Days, is the coming of the Son of Man in verse 27 a different "coming"? If it is the same "coming," then what is the judgment spoken of in verse 27? There are two possibilities. Since Jesus' receiving of the kingdom is part of an entire nexus of events that concludes only at the consummation and Second Coming, it could be that the judgment referred to in verse 27 is the final judgment. If so, Jesus speaks of the first and last events in the connected series as parts of a single whole but without mentioning the amount of time that might lapse between them. Another, more likely, possibility is that the judgment Jesus is referring to in verse 27 is the judgment referred to in Daniel 7:9–10, a heavenly judgment of the "beasts/nations" that is directly related to Jesus' receiving of the kingdom of God from the Father, an event that occurs in connection with his first advent.^vii

ⁱ W. D. Davies and D. C. Allison, Matthew 8–18 (London: T&T Clark, 1991), 677–9.
ⁱⁱ See Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 261.
ⁱⁱⁱ See Donald A. Hagner, "Matthew's Eschatology," in To Tell the Mystery, JSNTSup 100, ed. Thomas E. Schmidt and Moises Silva (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1994), 62.
^iv There are also some who believe that Jesus correctly predicted that his Second Coming would occur within the lifetime of some of those who were listening to him speak. They argue that the Second Coming of Jesus and all the events associated with it occurred already in the first century. For a critique of this interpretation, see Keith A. Mathison, ed, When Shall These Things Be? (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2004).
^v Some might ask whether this interpretation requires us to believe that nothing is said in the New Testament about the Second Coming of Christ. I do not believe this to be true. Jesus himself may have said very little about the Second Coming, but it must be remembered that his disciples were barely able to grasp the idea that he would be leaving them. It makes sense that the bulk of the New Testament's teaching on the Second Coming would be found after the resurrection and ascension (e.g., Acts 1:9–11; 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess. 4:16–17; Heb. 9:28).
^vi In our discussion of the "already/not yet" nature of the Kingdom of God, we observed that the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, second coming, and final judgment are all distinct events, but events that are part of a single whole – the coming of the kingdom. Some of these events are associated with the kingdom's inauguration, some with its consummation. What I am arguing here does not contradict this previous assertion. I am arguing here that when Jesus speaks of the "coming of the Son of Man" he is referring specifically to the events at the beginning of the series, those associated with the inauguration of the kingdom, not to events at the end of the series that are associated with its consummation. The events associated with the inauguration and with the consummation of the kingdom cannot ultimately be separated, but they are distinguished in the New Testament. It should also be observed that some of the events associated with the inauguration of the kingdom are seen as "first-fruits" of a larger whole that includes events associated with the consummation of the kingdom. The resurrection of Jesus, for example, is the "firstfruits" of a larger harvest that includes the general resurrection of the last day. The "coming of the Son of Man" is to the "Second Coming" what the inauguration of the kingdom is to the consummation of the kingdom, closely related but distinct concepts.
^vii Even if the judgment mentioned in Matthew 16:27 is the heavenly judgment of the beasts/nations found in Daniel 7, it is possible that there is a secondary reference to the final judgment since all of the events from the first advent to the second advent are part of a whole. The heavenly judgment of the beasts/nations at the first advent may be viewed as the "first fruits" of the eschatological judgment.

Adapted from From Age to Age by Keith Mathison. ISBN 978-0-87552-745-1
Used with permission of P&R Publishing Co. P O Box 817, Phillipsburg N.J. 08865 www.prpbooks.com

From Age to Age is available in the Ligonier store.

Twitter Highlights (5/13/12)

2012-05-11T16:39:45Z

Here are highlights from our various Twitter accounts over the past week.

Under the influence of an evil heart, every thing appears in false colors (Archibald Alexander).
— Ligonier Academy (@LigonierAcademy) May 7, 2012

The LORD is good, a stronghold in the day of trouble; he knows those who take refuge in him (Nah. 1:7).
— Tabletalk Magazine (@Tabletalk) May 7, 2012

Though sin often brings immediate pleasure, it gives no lasting joy. —R.C. Sproul bit.ly/qznEC2
— Reformation Trust (@RefTrust) May 7, 2012

God does not need me. —R.C. Sproul
— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 8, 2012

Recent polls suggest that two-thirds of evangelicals believe that man is basically good. Learn more about free will: bit.ly/IFxB74
— Ligonier Connect (@LigonierConnect) May 8, 2012

Becoming a Christian involves nothing less than a radical deliverance from the dominion of sin. —Sinclair Ferguson
— Ligonier Ministries (@Ligonier) May 9, 2012

God's law is a constant mirror; it never "cracks," no matter how many years pass or how many stones are thrown at it (@davidpmurray).
— Tabletalk Magazine (@Tabletalk) May 10, 2012

The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon by Steven Lawson is now available for #Kindle at Amazon bit.ly/LxL83F
— Reformation Trust (@RefTrust) May 11, 2012

You can also find our various ministries on Facebook:

Ligonier Ministries | Ligonier Academy | Ligonier Connect
Reformation Bible College | Reformation Trust | Tabletalk Magazine

The Eternal Significance of The Infinitely Insignificant

2011-12-29T21:57:55Z

And he said, "The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed on the ground. He sleeps and rises night and day, and the seed sprouts and grows; he knows not how. The earth produces by itself, first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear." — Matthew 4:26-28

Jesus said the spread of the kingdom of God is much like this process. It begins small, but while our attention is elsewhere, so to speak, the kingdom grows. Like the growth of a seed, it is a mysterious process.

We cannot see grass growing with the naked eye.

When I was in seminary, we often read and discussed the ideas of the higher critical scholars, who attacked every page of the Bible with their cynicism and skepticism. One of my professors constantly expressed amazement at "the arrogance of these men." When I asked what he meant, he said, "They think that they can watch the grass growing from two thousand years away." I instantly understood his point. We cannot see grass growing in the here and now; it is not a process we can observe with the naked eye. In the same way, the higher critical scholars are not able to make actual observations to support their conclusions about the biblical texts.

The things I say and do, though they seem infinitely insignificant to me, may have eternal significance as God uses me —Sproul

I find it very comforting to know that this is how God's kingdom works. This parable teaches me that the things I say and do, though they seem infinitely insignificant to me, may have eternal significance as God uses me in the building of His kingdom.

The power of a simple word.

Once, when I was standing at the church door after a service, a young man came up to me and began to tell me that he had heard me speak fifteen years before at a small church in Pennsylvania. He told me that following that service, he had asked me a question, and he was able to repeat my answer to him verbatim all those years later. He said, "When I went home, I could not get your words out of my head, and God used that comment that you made that day to convict me to go into the ministry." As I reflected on his story, I wondered how many other words I had spoken to people that had helped them—or, perhaps, wounded them, leaving scars on their souls that they carry to this day. We have no idea how powerful a simple word can be, for good or ill.

An encouragement for pastors.

Every year in the United States, thousands of pastors leave the ministry. Some leave for moral reasons, but most leave because they feel unappreciated by their congregations. They feel like they're spinning their wheels, that they're preaching their hearts out but nothing is happening. They need to hear this parable. Or they need to listen to Paul when he says, "Neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase"(1 Cor. 3:7). God can and does use their faithful preaching of His Word, though the preachers themselves may never see the effect their words have.

We are called to take the light and let it shine, then let God do with it whatever He pleases. —R.C. Sproul

I have been blessed to have some glimpses into how God has used my words. Some time ago, I had a conversation with Joni Eareckson Tada. At the time, she was dealing with chronic pain, and it was so bad she could not even sit in her wheelchair. To my surprise, she said, "I've been watching your videos and listening to your tapes every single day for hours, and I'm getting strength from those." Similarly, I received a letter recently from a man telling me how he first heard one of my lectures twenty years ago, then read some of my books, and he simply wanted to thank me for Ligonier Ministries. The letter was written by a man who is on national radio every day; he's one of the great leaders of the church today. I had no idea that anything I had said or written had had any impact on him.

Forget about trying to see the fruit.

That's the way the kingdom is. We often do not know what God does with our service. We plant the seed, go to bed, and, while we sleep, God germinates the seed so that life grows and eventually produces a full harvest. Then God Himself reaps for His own glory. We simply need to forget about trying to see the fruit of our service immediately. It does not matter if we ever see it. We are called to take the light and let it shine, then let God do with it whatever He pleases.

Excerpt adapted from R.C. Sproul's Mark, the fifth volume in the St. Andrew's Expositional Commentary series. Available in the Ligonier store.

All Truth is God's Truth — A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture

2012-05-09T10:31:52Z

In the Introduction to this series of blog posts, I asserted that Dr. Sproul's response to a question about the age of the universe at Ligonier's 2012 National Conference should be heard by every Reformed Christian interested in the topic. Why? Because Dr. Sproul takes into account issues that are usually mishandled or ignored altogether.

Dr. Sproul and the other panelists were asked about the age of the universe and asked whether it was an intramural discussion. Dr. Sproul began his response with the following words:

Not for some people. For some people it's an all or nothing issue. When people ask me how old the earth is I tell them "I don't know," because I don't. And I'll tell you why I don't. In the first place, the Bible does not give us a date of creation. Now it gives us hints and inclinations that would indicate in many cases a young earth. And at the same time you get all this expanding universe and all this astronomical dating, and triangulation and all that stuff coming from outside the church that makes me wonder, and I'll tell you why. I believe firmly that all of truth is God's truth...

I want to stop here because Dr. Sproul's statement "All truth is God's truth" is an important one that is questioned by many today. There are those with a postmodern mindset who question it because they question the very existence of objective truth, but postmodernism is not our present concern. Our present concern is with those who grant the existence of objective truth but who might also question this statement because of a suspicion that it might contradict the doctrine of sola scriptura or that it might in some other way be "non-Reformed."

We will address the issue of God's revelation (general and special) in the next installment of this series. Here, I simply want to ask whether the basic idea "All truth is God's truth" is something that a Reformed Christian should affirm. The idea was clearly expressed before the time of the Reformation. Augustine, the greatest theologian of the first millennium, expresses it in several places. In his On Christian Doctrine, for example, he writes, "Nay, but let every good and true Christian understand that wherever truth may be found, it belongs to his Master…" (II.18). The medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas developed the idea in more detail in his theological and philosophical works.

The idea, then, was obviously represented by the most important pre-Reformation theologians. But what about the Reformation itself? Was this idea rejected at that time? No. John Calvin picked up where Augustine and Aquinas left off. In his commentary on Titus 1:12, for example, Calvin states: "All truth is from God; and consequently, if wicked men have said anything that is true and just, we ought not to reject it; for it has come from God." He expands on this idea in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:

Therefore, in reading profane authors, the admirable light of truth displayed in them should remind us, that the human mind, however much fallen and perverted from its original integrity, is still adorned and invested with admirable gifts from its Creator. If we reflect that the Spirit of God is the only fountain of truth, we will be careful, as we would avoid offering insult to him, not to reject or condemn truth wherever it appears (II.2.15, emphasis mine).

So is the statement "All truth is God's truth" non-Reformed? Only if John Calvin is "non-Reformed." Calvin was able to assert, "All truth is God's truth," while also asserting the doctrine of sola scriptura because the doctrine of sola scriptura does not say that all truths are found in the Bible.ⁱ The doctrine of sola scriptura, in a nutshell, asserts that Scripture is our sole source of normative, infallible apostolic revelation and that "all things necessary for salvation and concerning faith and life are taught in the Bible with enough clarity that the ordinary believer can find them there and understand."ⁱⁱ The truths that are not found in the Bible (e.g. the date of your birth, the structure of protein molecules) are not necessary for salvation.

Closer to our own day, the Dutch Reformed systematic theologian Herman Bavinck wrote the following: "He [God] is the truth in its absolute fullness. He, therefore, is the primary, the original truth, the source of all truth, the truth in all truth. He is the ground of the truth – of the true being – of all things, of their knowability and conceivability, the ideal and archetype of all truth, of all ethical being, of all the rules and laws, in light of which the nature and manifestation of all things should be judged and on which they should be modeled. God is the source and origin of the knowledge of truth in all areas of life..."ⁱⁱⁱ

It is evident, then, that the general idea "All truth is God's truth" is not foreign to Reformed theology. But why not? It is beyond the scope of this brief blog post to delve into the philosophical discussions regarding the different theories of truth (correspondence, coherence, pragmatic, etc.). Because this article is addressed to Reformed Christians who, by and large, adhere to the correspondence concept of truth, and because the intent is to keep this as simple and straightforward as possible, we will assume the correspondence theory of truth for the remainder of this series of posts.^iv

The statement "All truth is God's truth" is consistent with Reformed theology because if something is true, it is because it is something that has been revealed by God, or because it is an accurate understanding of the nature of something created by God, or because it is an accurate description of something decreed by God. In other words, a God-centered view of truth demands that we affirm that all truth is God's truth. That which is true is true because God said it, created it, or decreed it.

Regarding the first part of this statement, God is a God who reveals. God Himself is true and cannot lie (Heb. 6:18). Therefore all that he reveals, whether through general revelation in His creation or through special revelation in Scripture is necessarily true.

Second, God is the God who creates (Gen. 1:1). He is the Maker of heaven and earth and all that is within them (Acts 14:15). This fact is closely related to the first, because God reveals certain things about Himself through creation (e.g. Rom. 1:18–20). In order for us to correctly see that revelation about God in His creation we have to accurately grasp the nature of what He has created. If we misread what is actually there, we will misrepresent God.

It is also worth observing that God's creation is real and not an illusion, and God created man with the ability to learn about and have true knowledge of what He created. As Calvin noted, this ability was impacted by the Fall, but it was not completely destroyed. Scripture regularly assumes man has the ability to learn about creation. Proverbs is probably the most obvious example of this phenomenon because in Proverbs man is expected to draw true conclusions about God and reality based on his observations of creation. Created things are what they are because God created them a certain way rather than another. When we learn something about creation that corresponds with what God actually made, we have learned something true. God is the source of these truths by virtue of the fact that He is the Creator.

Finally, God is the one who has decreed whatsoever comes to pass, and this is the basis of historical truths. When we learn something about history that is in accordance with what actually happened, we have learned something true to the extent that our knowledge corresponds with what actually happened, and what actually happened only happened, ultimately, because God decreed it.

When Dr. Sproul asserts "All truth is God's truth," he is not making a statement that is somehow less than Reformed. On the contrary, he is making an assertion, following Augustine, Calvin, and ultimately Scripture, that is the only statement a consistently Reformed Christian can make.

In our next installment, we will take a closer look at general and special revelation.

ⁱW. Robert Godfrey, "What Do We Mean By Sola Scriptura," in Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible, 2d ed., edited by Don Kistler (Reformation Trust, 2009), 2.
ⁱⁱIbid.
ⁱⁱⁱReformed Dogmatics, 2:209–10.
^ivThe correspondence theory of truth asserts that a true proposition is one that corresponds to fact – to some aspect of reality. Aristotle summed up the concept in a well-known definition: "To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true" (Metaphysics 1011b25).