Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 239 Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Deprecated: strripos(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($needle) of type string is deprecated in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 New Testament - Search - The Staunch Calvinist Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 239 Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Deprecated: strripos(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($needle) of type string is deprecated in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251
The Staunch Calvinist

"Absolute sovereignty is what I love to ascribe to God." - Jonathan Edwards

Search


You searched for 'New Testament'

I've found 42 results!


1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 11: Of Justification - Commentary

...r judgments, or of offended persons in their forgiveness of offenders.[15]

The Judge of the Universe, because of the atoning death of His Beloved Son on our behalf, declares us to be righteous. Our union with Christ makes it so that His death becomes our death, His resurrection our resurrection, His life our life, His righteousness our righteousness. Although we have not yet been perfectly conformed to His image, we are certainly predestined to that end (Rom. 8:29). In other words, God will make us righteous, but this is not what the New Testament speaks about for our salvation. Rather, this is sanctification in which the Holy Spirit works to change us into Christ’s image, but it is a life-long process of ups and downs (see chapter 13).

Blessings of Justification

What is accomplished by God through justification? First of all, as the Confession states, “pardoning their sins” is one of the blessings coming from our justification. For example, Paul says:

Rom. 4:4-8 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: 7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; 8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” 

Notice how closely is justification tied to the forgiveness of sins that Paul calls upon Psalms 32:1-2 as evidence for the fruit of justification. In this passage, we come also to the second blessing of justification, namely, our faith being counted as righteousness (v. 5), or to state it in another way: “accounting and accepting their persons as righteous”. We spoke about this above (see here). In this connection, we should observe that justification does not only consist of the forgiveness of sins but also is tied to the fact that we are accounted righteous. Matthew Poole comments on v. 5 as follows:

This testimony is taken out of Psa 32:1, and it is well enough accommodated to the occasion, for those two, to remit sin, and to impute righteousness, are inseparable. The one is put here figuratively for the other. They mistake, who take occasion from hence to make justification to consist only in remission of sin: the text will not bear it. The apostle’s design is, not hereby to declare the full nature of justification, which he had done before; but only to prove the freedom of it from any respect to works, in the instance of this principal and essential part of it. Remission of sin and the imputation of righteousness differ, as the cause and the effect. Remission of sin presupposeth imputation of righteousness; and he that hath his sins remitted, hath Christ’s righteousness first imputed, that so they may be remitted and forgiven to sinners.[16]

Philip Schaff comments on the blessedness of v. 6:

Pronounceththe blessedness; speaks the congratulation, the pronouncing blessed. The quotation is of forgiveness, of not being reckoned a sinner; but the Apostle takes this as equivalent to the Lord reckoneth righteousness. ‘It is implied by Paul, that the remission of sin is equivalent to the imputation of righteousness, that there is no negative state of innocence, none intermediate between acceptance for righteousness, and rejection for sin’ (Alford).[17]

These are the two blessings of justification: forgiv...


1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 13: Of Sanctification - Commentary

... Exo 28:43; Heb 9:2-3; Heb 9:12; 1Ki 6:16; 1Ki 8:6; Eze 41:23). So, also, men are said to be hallowed, as Aaron and his sons (1Ch 23:13; 1Ch 24:5; Isa 43:28), the firstborn (Exo 13:2), and the Hebrew people (Exo 19:10; Exo 19:14; Daniel 12), also the pious Hebrews, the “saints” (Deu 33:3; Psa 16:3; Dan 7:18), like the word חָסַיד, rendered “saint” (Psa 30:4; Psa 31:23; Psa 37:28; Psa 1:5; Psa 52:9; Psa 79:2; Psa 97:10), and “godly” (Psa 4:3).[5]

In the New Testament, we meet a few Greek words with the same basic input. The verb ἁγιάζω (hagiazo, G37) in its various forms is used 25 times in the New Testament. It is used to mean “to separate, consecrate; cleanse, purify, sanctify; regard or reverence as holy”.[6] It is used of God’s name (Matt. 6:9; Luke 11:2); the gold of the temple, the gift on the altar (Matt. 23:17, 19); of Christ (John 10:36; 17:19; Heb. 2:11; 10:29 see here; 1 Pet. 3:15); of believers (John 17:17, 19; Acts 20:32; 26:18; 1 Cor. 1:2; 6:11; 1 Thess. 5:23; 2 Tim. 2:21; Heb. 2:11; 10:10, 14; 13:12; Rev. 22:11); of the church (Eph 5:26); of the unbelieving spouse and children (1 Cor. 7:14); of things made holy by the word of God and prayer (1 Tim. 4:5); of the flesh (Heb. 9:13). As Louis Berkhof observes, “The verb hagiazo is a derivative of hagios, which like the Hebrew qadosh expresses primarily the idea of separation.”[7]

The next word is the adjective ἅγιος (hagios, G40). Hagios is used 221 times in the New Testament. Mounce explains:

In general, two facts stand out in the NT regarding hagios (“holy, sacred”). First, God and what is associated with him is declared as “holy.” God is specifically described as holy (Jn. 17:11; 1 Pet. 1:15-16; Rev. 6:8; 6:10), and Christ is called holy in the same sense as God (Rev. 3:7; cf. 1 Jn. 2:20). God’s name is holy (Lk. 1:49), as is his covenant (Lk. 1:72), his angels (Mk. 8:38; Lk. 9:26; Acts 10:22; Jude 14; Rev. 14:10), his attendants (Eph. 2:19; Col. 1:12; 1 Thess. 3:13; Rev. 18:20), the prophets (Lk. 1:70), and the Scriptures (Rom. 1:2; 7:12). Jesus is addressed as “the Holy One of God” by an unclean spirit (Mk. 1:24; Lk. 4:34), by the angel Gabriel (Lk. 1:35), and by Simon Peter (Jn. 6:69). He is called God’s “holy servant” (Acts 4:27; cf. 3:14). Here reference to “holy” means belonging to and authorized by God and thus, resisting Jesus is equivalent to resisting God.

Second, the proper sphere of the holy in the NT is not priestly or ritual but the prophetic. The sacred no longer belongs to things, places, or rites, but to manifestations of life produced by the Spirit. In Paul’s letters those who name Jesus as their Lord are called hagoi, “saints.” This is not primarily an ethical expression but is parallel to being “called” (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:2), “chosen” (Rom. 8:33; Col. 3:12), and “faithful” (Col. 1:2). It implies association with the Holy Spirit. Christ is the one in whom believers become holy to the true God (see 1 Cor. 6:11). The power to do so comes from the risen Christ, who operates according to the Spirit of holiness (Rom. 1:4). In these cases holiness refers to a relationship with God that is not mediated through ritual (ceremonial) observance but through the leading of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:14). Spiritual worship is the offering of oneself as a living, holy sacrifice, acceptable to God (Rom. 12:1).[8]

This word is also used all over the LXX. This is the word used in the name the Holy Spirit; this is the word which is used of the “saints”; t...


1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 2: Of God and of the Holy Trinity - Commentary

...dquo;[35]

Not only is the Son of God here clearly called God, but the creation is said to be made through Him, and without Him, nothing was made! God the Father created through the agency of the Son. He is the Creator. No one can be said to be the creator of everything than God. Colossians 1:15-17 is gloriously in agreement with Jesus being the Creator of everything that exists. If He has created everything that exists, this means that the Son is uncreated, and therefore eternal, without beginning. The International Critical Commentary on the New Testament notes the following:

Before anything is said by him about creation, he proclaims that the Logos was in being originally—ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν, not ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐγένετο (see for the distinction on 8:58). This doctrine is also found in the Apocalypse. In that book, Christ is also called the Word of God (19:13), and He is represented (22:13) as claiming pre-existence: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” Paul, who does not apply the title “Logos” to Christ, yet has the same doctrine of His pre-existence: “He is before all things” (Col. 1:17). With this cf. the words ascribed to Jesus in 17:5.[36]

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges notes concerning the verb was in John 1:1a, saying, “The Arians maintained that there was a period when the Son was not: S. John says distinctly that the Son or Word was existing before time began, i.e. from all eternity.”[37] Our last commentary is from Philip Schaff:

And the Word was with God: the second of the three statements made in this verse regarding the Word, and obviously higher than the first. It is impossible to convey in English the full force of the preposition ‘with’ in the Greek, for it denotes not merely being beside, but maintaining communion and intercourse with (comp. Mar 6:3; 1Jn 1:2; 1Jn 2:1).

And the Word was God: the third and highest statement respecting the Word. The Word is possessed of divine essence; in that being in which He ‘was,’ He so possesses the divine attributes that He is God. There is difference of personality, but unity of nature. In this last clause the climax of the three clauses is complete.[38]

John 1:18

In the prologue of John (John 1:1-18), the Lord Jesus is once again called God. This time He is called the μονογενὴς θεὸς (monogenes theos). The unique or only God. 

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. 

He is the only One Who truly knows and comprehends God the Father (Matt. 11:27) and He is the exact revelation of God the Father sent into the world (Heb. 1:3; Col. 1:15; John 14:7). Notice that the Son is here again distinguished from the Father as in the first verse of the gospel. The Monogenes Theos is at the Father’s side. He is not the Father, but He is in His presence, as He was from all eternity in John 1:1b. Again and again, Scripture both reveals the deity of the Son and also the distinction of persons in the Godhead. The Son is the One Who has exegeted (ἐξηγήσατο, exēgēsato) the Father to us. He is the One Who has explained the Father to us. The Son of God is absolutely equal to the Father here. He is called the Only or Unique God. Some manuscripts here had “only Son” instead of “only God”, but the oldest and most reliable manuscripts have “only God” here. Dr. White elsewhere writes that ‘the most ancient texts, including the oldest existing copies of John’s gospel (P66 and P7...


A Review of Jeffrey D. Johnson's The Fatal Flaw

...hat meaning the whole period of the Old Testament, the Covenant of Grace was seen in the shadows and prophecies (See certain shadows in the Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic covenants). But under the New Testament dispensation we have a fuller revelation of God’s purposes and the Covenant of Grace which was fully revealed in the New Covenant.

The Westminister position is summed up in the last sentence in paragraph 6 –

…There are not therefore two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.

As Pascal Denault puts it: one covenant, two administrations.

Sign of the Covenant

Our Presbyterian brethren argue that the sign of the covenant of grace prior to the New Covenant was circumcision. Circumcision was applied to all males within the covenant. In fact, 8 days old infants were required to be circumcised.

They see the sign of the covenant being replaced from circumcision to baptism on the basis of their interpretation of Rom 4:11 and Col 2:11-12. Johnson spends quite some time on Romans 4:11.

Now let us apply the Westminster understanding of the Covenant of Grace to this. The Covenant of Grace was administered under Abraham and Moses and obviously included infants. In fact it commanded infants to bear its sign. Therefore, unless the contrary could be proven, infants are also admitted into the last administration of the Covenant of Grace – the New Covenant and should receive its sign, which they believe is baptism.

It’s understandable if the theology of the Covenant of Grace is correct.

Turn the Tables!

For those credobaptists who are not familiar with the Westminster position which is rooted in Covenant Theology, infant baptism is something they would not come up with by simply reading the Bible. Thus, they think that the case is closed by the fact that infant baptism is nowhere described or commanded in the New Testament.

But through Covenant Theology the Paedeobaptists turn the tables upon the non-covenantal Credobaptist. They teach that the covenants of God were made with the believers and their seed. This is one basic aspect of the various administrations of the Covenant of Grace (from their perspective), which they assume would continue to the last administration of the Covenant of Grace, that is – the New Covenant. This is understandable.  Thus, they counter the non-covenantal credobaptism with the following:

“Unless an express statue of repeal and prohibition of the former privilege can be produced, the natural conclusion is that the old rule remained in force as regards their place of infant children of the believer within the visible fellowship of faith to which their parent belongs.” (p. 28, from Douglas Bannerman)

The tables have now been turned. The non-covenantal Credobaptist demands proof for infant baptism, the covenantal Paedobaptist argues from the previous administrations of the covenant of grace and places the burden of proof in the hands of the Credobaptist.

For the non-covenantal Credobaptist to win the argument, he would have to provide a prohibition for infant baptism, or an explicit statement about the exclusion of infants from the New Covenant.

The Critique of the Westminster Position

Throughout the book Jeffery Johnson tries to demonstrate why the Westminster position is inconsistent and unbiblical. He starts by examining the analogy between baptism and circumcision (chapter 2).

Baptism is the New Cir...


1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 14: Of Saving Faith - Commentary

... (2 Thess. 2:13; 1 Pet. 1:23), i.e., by the preaching of the gospel coupled with the work of the Spirit of Christ. This faith is further strengthened by the means of grace. These are the gospel ordinances, baptism and the Lord’s Supper. But also prayer, Bible reading and study, the communion of the saints and other things prescribed and commended in the Word of truth. By these means, faith is not created, but it is increased and strengthened.


Greek Words

We will start our study of faith by first noting which words are used in the New Testament especially to denote faith and belief. The word faith or belief in our daily lives may be used in a lot of senses. We may say that we believe that someone is speaking the truth and mean that we have confidence. We may say, “I believe that I’ve read that book” when we actually mean that we “think we read that book.” We use it when we have confidence or trust in something without evidence. In secular eyes, faith is always connected with believing something without or contrary to evidence. But is this the nature of biblical faith? Before we answer that, we must take a survey of the Greek words and expressions used to denote faith, particularly in the New Testament.

Pistis

The primary word in the New Testament for faith is the Greek noun πίστις (pistis, G4102). According to Joseph Henry Thayer, pistis primarily means the “conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man’s relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it”[3]. According to my Bible software (TheWord), it is used 227x in the NA28. William D. Mounce says that 'pistis means “belief, trust, confidence,” though it can also mean “faithfulness.”’[4] If we may at the outset observe, the basic meaning of the word has to do with conviction, trust, reliance, and confidence. It has nothing to do with “faith without evidence.” Louis Berkhof observes:

In classical Greek. The word pistis has two meanings in classical Greek. It denotes: (a) a conviction based on confidence in a person and in his testimony, which as such is distinguished from knowledge resting on personal investigation; and (b) the confidence itself on which such a conviction rests. This is more than a mere intellectual conviction that a person is reliable; it presupposes a personal relation to the object of confidence, a going out of one’s self, to rest in another. The Greeks did not ordinarily use the word in this sense, to express their relation to the gods, since they regarded these as hostile to men, and therefore as objects of fear rather than of trust.[5]

Now let us observe the different uses of the noun pistis in the New Testament. First of all, there are a few instances in which it is used in a passive sense of faithfulness. This is the case in Romans 3:3 when Paul says, “Does [the Jews’] faithlessness [ἀπιστία, apistia] nullify the faithfulness [πίστιν, pistin] of God?” Or in Galatians 5:22 of the fruit of “faithfulness [πίστις, pistis]”, or in Matthew 23:2, “the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness [πίστινpistin].” It may be used in this sense in Revelation 13:10 when John speaks of the “the endurance and faith [πίστιςpistis] of the saints” amidst persecution. In Titus 2:10, slaves are called to show “all good faith [πίστινpistin]” toward their masters “so that in everything they may adorn the doc...


1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 30: Of the Lord's Supper - Commentary

...g at this table indicates close communion with Christ. Paul says, if you’re going to the table of false gods, you are participating and communing with demons. Therefore, when one goes to the table of the true and only Lord, they are communing and participating with the true God. This table is holy because the Lord claims it as His own for His communion with His people. In this connection, we may call the Lord’s Supper, Communion, because in partaking of it, the faithful have a real and spiritual communion with their Savior as He administers grace to them.

The Breaking Of Bread

This is the first designation of the Lord’s Supper in the New Testament. It is used in Luke 24:35; Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, 11; 1 Corinthians 10:16-17. The early Christians were continually celebrating the Lord’s Supper in the manner which their Lord did. As Christ took bread and broke it, so the Christians called this ordinance the breaking of bread, which reminded them of Christ’s body given for them. Notice that in Acts 20:7, the purpose of the church gathering on the Lord’s Day, is to break bread. They were gathered on the Christian Sabbath, as a church, to celebrate the Lord’s Supper.

Eucharist

Eucharist means thanksgiving and refers to the words of Christ in Luke 22:19 before breaking and distributing the bread to His disciples. The Greek verb for giving thanks is εὐχαριστήσας (eucharistēsas). There is no doubt that thanksgiving should play a fundamental part as we celebrate the Lord’s Supper, thinking of the work of Christ and receiving the benefits thereof anew in a spiritual and close communion with our Savior. But unfortunately, this name is closely associated with the abominable sacrifice of the Mass, therefore, it is not used by Protestants.

Significance

There are several things that are signified by the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper is not a dead ritual, but a sign and a token, which signifies and grants grace to those who already believe (see Means of Grace below). Here are the things which the Lord’s Supper signifies.

The Lord’s Death

The most obvious thing that the Lord’s Supper signifies is the Lord’s sacrificial death on behalf of His people. His body was broken and His blood was shed for His people so as to redeemed them from sin. The Lord’s Supper reminds the Christian of the pivotal event of history when our Lord died on that cross to take away our sin and bear in Himself the punishment thereof. Therefore, whenever we celebrate the Lord’s Supper, we are reminded of the work of Christ on behalf of His people in His vicarious death on the cross. As we are reminded of that work we are also receiving new graces and appreciation of that glorious work of redemption. This is especially true when the Lord’s Supper is preceded by a confession of sin. As we think of Christ’s atonement, we are reminded that all our sins have been washed away and we have been given the perfect righteousness of Christ instead of our filthy rags. In this ordinance, we have signified for us that Christ shed His blood and His body was broken for our sake, so as to forgive us of every sin. Both the ones we did before our regeneration and after our regeneration, even the ones which we confessed before participating in the Lord’s Supper.

Communion With Christ

In rejection of the Roman Catholic and Lutheran understanding of Christ’s presence in the Supper, the Reformed understand Christ’s presence to be spiritual. Roman Catholics are fond of expressing Christ’s pre...


A Review of O. Palmer Robertson's The Israel of God

...ist of Whom it is written that He “tabernacled” among us (John 1:14). But it will also have its ultimate fulfillment on the New Heavens and New Earth (Rev 21:1-5).

An important aspect which Dr. Robertson highlights is the fact that the land actually belongs to the Lord. As Leviticus 25:23 puts it, “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me.” The land is the Lord’s and the people of Israel are merely strangers and sojourners in the land with Yahweh. He gives the land to whomever He wills and does with it as He pleases.

An important aspect which Dr. Robertson highlights and the New Testament emphasizes is that the land is typological of the New Heavens and New Earth. Hebrews 11 says that although Abraham was the one who received the promise of the land of Canaan in which he sojourned, yet he was actually looking and desiring “a better country, that is, a heavenly one” (Heb 11:16). The saints of old were “seeking a homeland” which is not of this world (Heb 11:14). Although Abraham lived in the “the land of promise”, says Hebrews 11:9-10, yet in actuality he understood the typology of the land and therefore “he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (v. 11). This is clearly the New Heavens and New Earth, and not the land of Canaan.

In Romans 4:13 we have the promise of the land expanded. It is no longer the small land of Canaan, but now it is the whole cosmos—the New Heavens and New Earth. Therefore, the people of God are not promised the small portion of land in the Middle East, but the whole earth is promised to the meek (Matt 5:5). Robertson writes:

Because God is the Lord of the whole universe, he will fulfill his covenant promise of redemption by reconstituting the cosmos. In this way, paradise will be restored in all its glory. The blessing of land that humanity first experienced will finally be graciously given back to him. (p. 10)

Another thing which is often missed by our Dispensational brethren is the fact that the land promises were completely fulfilled as recorded in Scripture by the time of Joshua, David and Solomon (Josh 23:43-45; 1Chron 18:14; 1Kgs 4:1, 20-21; c.f. Gen 15:18-21). Furthermore, the Mosaic Covenant regulated the blessings and the possession of the land (see for example Deut 28; Lev 20:22-23). When the people disobeyed and broke the Lord’s covenant, He brought judgment upon them and exiled them away from their homeland. This is a point which is, in my opinion, often missed by those who contend that the land of Canaan is for the Israelites forever from a theological perspective. Seeing that the Mosaic Covenant is abrogated, the regulations which existed for the possession and blessings of the land are also done away with. Not only that, we should not forget that the New Testament teaches us that the land was typological.

Much more could be said, but simply read the chapter. It is really mind-opening.  

Its People

When we speak of Israel, whom do we actually mean? How does the Bible define Israel?

In chapter 2 Dr. Robertson deals with the question of who are the heirs of the land promise. Who is Israel actually? As a covenant theologian and not a Dispensationalist, one can already expect the answer. The Israel of God are all Jewish and Gentile believers in the Messiah.

There is nothing special in the ethnicity of the Jews, which makes them more holy or more spe...


Review of Dean Davis' The High King of Heaven on Amillennialism

...37:26-28
  • Galatians 4:26-27 & Isaiah 54:1ff
  • Hebrews 8:1-13 & Jeremiah 31:31-34
  • 2 Peter 3:13 & Isaiah 65:17; 66:22
  • The interpretation and allusions of the NT of and to these texts indeed do demonstrate the accuracof the New Covenant Hermeneutic.

    Revelation 20 and the Structure of Revelation

    Before coming to this difficult chapter we should have some idea of the structure of the Salvation History and the Kingdom of God learned from the Didactic New Testament (Gospels and Epistles), we should not radically change our view of the Kingdom and Salvation History based on a difficult and a passage in an obviously symbolic book.

    The cycles

    The first step to the belief that the Millennium is the Era of Proclamation is the understanding of structure of Revelation.

    Dean Davis believes that the book of Revelation has 6 cycles beginning from the Cross and ending at the Consummation. These are:

    1. Revelation 6-7 – The Six Seals
    2. Revelation 8-11 – The Seven Trumpets
    3. Revelation 12-14 – The Woman and the Dragon
    4. Revelation 15-16 – The Seven Bowls
    5. Revelation 17-19 – The fall of the Dragon’s Helpers
    6. Revelation 20 – The 1,000 Years

    These cycles describe the entire Church Age from different angles and with intensification. There are aspects in each cycle which are still future.

    Speaking of myself when I first got introduced to this way of looking at Revelation I think it was by pastor Voddie Bauchum’s series on Revelation or Sam Storms’ Kingdom Come the thing that caught me to this view were the repeated judgments which seem to me to be final and not temporary judgments. Further, the fact that the book was given to the seven church (and to the church universal) in the first century and that these things were “near” (Rev 1:3).

    The Judgment in Revelation 6

    Rev 6:12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, Rev 6:13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. Rev 6:14 The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. Rev 6:15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, Rev 6:16 calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, Rev 6:17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

    We have in Revelation 7 a beautiful picture of the Consummation.

    The Judgment in Revelation 11

    Rev 11:15 Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.” Rev 11:16 And the twenty-four elders who sit on their thrones before God fell on their faces and worshiped God, Rev 11:17 saying, “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, who is and who was, for you have taken your great power and begun to reign. Rev 11:18 The nations raged, but your wrath came, and the time for the dead to be judged, and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints, and those who fear your name, both small and great, and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.” Rev 11:19 Then God's temple in h...


    1689 Second Baptist Confession of Faith Highlighted

    ...trong6
    1. Isa. 8:20; Luke 16:29; Eph. 2:20; 2 Tim. 3:15-17
    2. Ps. 19:1-3; Rom. 1:19-21, 32; 2:12a, 14-15
    3. Ps. 19:1-3 with vv. 7-11; Rom. 1:19-21; 2:12a, 14-15 with 1:16-17; and 3:21
    4. Heb. 1:1-2a
    5. Prov. 22:19-21; Luke 1:1-4; 2 Peter 1:12-15; 3:1; Deut. 17:18ff; 31:9ff, 19ff; 1 Cor. 15:1; 2 Thess. 2:1-2, 15; 3:17; Rom. 1:8-15; Gal. 4:20; 6:11; 1 Tim. 3:14ff; Rev. 1:9, 19; 2:1 etc.; Rom. 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19-21
    6. Heb. 1:1-2a; Acts 1:21-22; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:7-8; Eph. 2:20
  • Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these: 
    OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OF THE New Testament
    Genesis Matthew
    Exodus Mark
    Leviticus Luke
    Numbers John
    Deuteronomy Paul’s Epistle to the Romans
    Joshua  I Corinthians & II Corinthians
    Judges Galatians
    Ruth Ephesians
    I Samuel & II Samuel Philippians
    I Kings & II Kings Colossians
    I Chronicles, II Chronicles I Thessalonians & II Thessalonians
    Ezra I Timothy & II Timothy
    Nehemiah To Titus
    Esther To Philemon
    Job The Epistle to the Hebrews
    Psalms Epistle of James
    Proverbs The first and second Epistles of Peter
    Ecclesiastes The first, second, and third Epistles of John
    The Song of Solomen The Epistle of Jude
    Isaiah The Revelation
    Jeremiah  
    Lamentations  
    Ezekiel  
    Daniel  
    Hosea  
    Joel  
    Amos  
    Obadiah  
    Jonah  
    Micah  
    Nahum  
    Habakkuk  
    Zephaniah  
    Haggai  
    Zechariah  
    Malachi   
  •         All of which are given by the inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life. 1

    1. The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon or rule of the Scripture, and, therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings. 1
      1. Luke 24:27, 44; Rom. 3:2
    1. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, 1 but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the author thereof; therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God. 2
      1. 2 Tim. 3:15; 1 John 5:9; Rom. 1:2; 3:2; Acts 2:16; 4:25; Matt. 13:35; Rom. 9:17; Gal. 3:8; Rom. 15:4; 1 Cor. 10:11; Matt. 22:32; Luke 16:17; Matt. 22:41ff; John 10:35; Gal. 3:16; Acts 1:16; 2:24ff; 13:34-35; John 19:34-36, 24; Luke 22:37; Matt. 26:54; John 13:18; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-21; Matt. 5:17-18; 4:1-11
      2.  Luke 15:27-31; Gal. 1:8-9; Eph. 2:2
    1. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church of God to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures; 1 and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, and the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the w...

    John Owen's Case For Particular Atonement

    ... Jeremiah 31:31-34; chapter 17 here and here.

    Owen's basic argument is as follows:

    The first argument may be taken from the nature of the covenant of grace, which was established, ratified, and confirmed in and by the death of Christ; that was the testament whereof he was the testator, which was ratified in his death, and whence his blood is called “The blood of the New Testament,” Matt. 26:28. Neither can any effects thereof be extended beyond the compass of this covenant. But now this covenant was not made universally with all, but particularly only with some, and therefore those alone were intended in the benefits of the death of Christ.[16] (Book III, chapter 1)

    The Two Classes of Men (Arg. IV)

    Owen's argument here is that since the Bible separates people into two categories, namely, believers and unbelievers, and various other designations of the groups, therefore, when Christ is said to die for one, it is implicit that He did not die for the other. In his own words:

    If all mankind be, in and by the eternal purpose of God, distinguished into two sorts and conditions, severally and distinctly described and set forth in the Scripture, and Christ be peculiarly affirmed to die for one of these sorts, and nowhere for them of the other, then did he not die for all; for of the one sort he dies for all and every one, and of the other for no one at all.[17] (Book III, chapter 2)

    The elect are designated also as:

    those whom he “loves”…Rom. 9:13; whom he “knoweth,”...John 10:14, “I know my sheep;” 2 Tim. 2:19, “The Lord knoweth them that are his;” Rom. 8:29, “Whom he did foreknow;” chap. 11:2, “His people which he foreknew;” “I know you not,” Matt. 25:12: so John 13:18, “I speak not of you all; I know whom I have chosen.” Those that are appointed to life and glory, and those that are appointed to and fitted for destruction, — “elect” and “reprobate;” those that were “ordained to eternal life,” and those who “before were of old ordained to condemnation:” as Eph. 1:4, “He hath chosen us in him;” Acts 13:48, “Ordained to eternal life;” Rom. 8:30, “Whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” So, on the other side, 1 Thess. 5:9, “God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation;” Rom. 9:18–21, “He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour?” Jude 4, “Ordained to this condemnation;” 2 Pet. 2:12, “Made to be taken and destroyed;” “Sheep and goats,” Matt. 25:32; John 10 passim. Those on whom he hath “mercy,” and those whom he “hardeneth,” Rom. 9:18. Those that are his “peculiar people” and “the children of promise,” that are “not of the world,” his “church;”[18] (Book III, chapter 2)

    All these things are true only of the redeemed, the elect of God from all eternity. But this is not the only group which Scripture knows. On the other hand, Scripture designates the reprobates in the following words:

    ...in opposition to them, are “the world,” “not prayed for,” “not his people:” as Tit. 2:14; Gal. 4:28; John 15:19, 17:9; Col. 1:24; John 11:52; Heb. 2...