Hrm. I’ve heard a lot of discussion on free will as of late and came across this quote by B.B Warfield.

Christ dwells within us not for the purpose of sinking our being into His being, nor of substituting Himself for us as the agent in our activities; much less of seizing our wills and operating them for us in contradiction to our own immanent mind; but to operate directly upon us, to make us good, that our works, freely done by us, may under His continual leading, be good also.

B.B. Warfield

I hope this doesn’t come off as arrogant. But I’m glad the “How Dare You!” phrase is catching on.

It makes me smile, when freshmen and sophomores go around saying “How Dare You!” in their squeaky little voices. HAHA!

on a more serious note. I talked to a couple people about their thoughts on religion and got to share the gospel with them.

As I talked to them and realized there was no convincing them, however well the conversation went, I remembered Romans 2.

1Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.

6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.

Before my coming to know Christ, How dare I reject Him when I have seen the beauty of creation and redemption in His Word.

I’m glad that God softened my heart. And by his common and special grace I’m glad I was led to repentance.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/tgc-video/2009-conference/plenary/Carson_session_10.mp3

excerpt (not verbatim):

since their conscience is weak it is defiled… the issue is how do you preserve the integrity of the individual conscience? Be careful how you exercise your rights… Be careful that the exercise of this right does not become a stumbling block to the weak… That’s what weak means here. Someone who has sensitivities to right and wrong even though in the issue itself it’s not a matter of right and wrong. Somebody who has sensitivities and thinks that something is wrong even though it’s not. That’s what makes it a weak conscience…

Now this passage is often abused in some conservative circles. It is less so today than 30 years ago but today in some circles. “I don’t think you should drink alcohol, and if you do you would be offending me so 1 Corinthians 8 says you must not do it because you would be offending me.” Now most of the people that said something like that to me really doesn’t have weak consciences. They’re control freaks. They’re legalists in the worst possible sense.

And so I inevitably say in that case, do you think that no Christian can drink, that a person who drinks is not a Christian or can’t be a Christian, do you think it is essential to be a tea-tottler to be a Christian. And if they say yes, I say pass the pork. And I’m not be a smart alec because the Word of God won’t allow anyone or anything to jeopardize the exclusive sufficiency of Jesus, it’s not Jesus plus being a tea-tottler. In this country I wander around as a tea-tottler, but in France I’m not promising anything. But in this country I’m a tea-tottler unless somebody tells me I must not drink or I cannot be a Christian than I will glad have some Burgeoule.

You cannot jeopardize the exclusive sufficiency of Jesus. This passage is talking about weak consciences. People you can lead astray. People with sensitivities.

At that point what does Paul say? “If what I eat causes my brother to sin, I will never eat again so that I will not cause them to fall.”

Here is the self-abnegation of a right out of love and concern for the brother and sister in Christ… And it is done cheerfully (1 Cor. 9)

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.
28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.
31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged.
32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

1 Corinthians 11:27-32

Communion should be taken seriously. But as often as we can, in remembrance of Him (1 Cor 11:25).

The good in Communion as a religious rite and ordinance, is that it is a “means” and a “constituted means” to remember Christ. Not the necessary to satisfy what is sufficient, which is remembering Christ, but simply a means in which the action (in this case, communion) can be a cause for an effect (in this case, remembering Christ).

If we can do it as many times and as often as we can. Why not? If it is a means to remember Christ why not?

I think the question goes forth from the imperative voicing in Paul’s following statements, right after the quoted imperative of Christ for believers to practice Communion as often as we can.

The question is, what then is often? The point of Communion practiced often as 1 Cor 11:26 says, is to “proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”

However Paul’s following statements emphatically states that whosoever practices this rite in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and the blood of the Lord. It almost seems threatening when verse 29 says “for anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.”

It seems like an impossible task that is mandated on believers, to do something as often as they can, yet at the same time to take it seriously every single time. To that end, this is what the Word of God calls for and I don’t think believers can and should beat around the bush regarding the measure of what Communion requires because the remembrance of Christ is at stake and a disregard for that practice is a pronouncement of judgment on oneself, but more so it is a defamation of the death of Christ when this ordinance is practiced so flippantly.

Well the question is still left unanswered, how often should we do it then.

Personally, I am convicted through scripture that we shouldn’t need to do it every week. And just because we don’t do it every week doesn’t mean it is not being practiced “often”. My church practices bimonthly and I think it is completely acceptable and even profitable to do so. I think that because I see that my Church is seeking a desirable end that is consistent and accurate to scripture especially to 1 Corinthians 11. The specific principle, to 1 Corinthians 11, as directed to social snobbery of the Corinthian church, is to practice Communion as to proclaim the Lord’s death as a public devotion to Christ’s work and His eventual coming, but also a practice of private devotion, in which the practice Communion is to remind the redeemed that Christ has most definitely redeemed us to justification before a most holy God by the blood of Christ and that His resurrection is evidence for our future resurrection in a glorified state. To neglect Communion as a private devotion, as in, coming before the communion table a worthy manner, demonstrated by a heart of repentance tested through personal examination and discernment of the Word, is to utterly denigrate and disparage the glory of the Cross and it’s work the personal heart of man.

The heart that I only know of. And the heart that only you know of.

I think this is the scariest thing. We might be obedient almost every time by our public devotion shown through Communion, as I am very much encouraged when I see the proclamation of Christ by my friends and fellow church members partaking in the eating of the bread and drinking of wine (grape juice). However if even one man (or I) comes before the communion table without a heart of repentance as my personal devotion, I am pronouncing judgment on myself. And this judgment is something that only I will know of and no one else.

So is it necessarily wrong to do it every week? I don’t think so. And is it necessarily right to do it bimonthly? I don’t think so either. But what I am convicted by, is that a church takes Communion seriously and the church should take directive measures to take communion seriously. The implications behind a bimonthly (or any discerned amount of space of time) practice of Communion delineates to the congregation that this ordinance is an ordinance that is practiced to obey the various mandates of the new covenant, but also it must be taken seriously as an activity of private devotion, hence the spreading of time in order for the church to proclaim to its congregation that communion is not meant to be ritualistic and redundant, but taken seriously as it is a opportunity for both private and public devotion to be practiced and obeyed.

In that end, I realized, as emphatically expressed in A.W Tozer’s rut, rot, or revival and P.A’s incite on desirable ends being sought by constituted means, the christian man need not get caught up and overwhelmed by the means as that might lead to legalism, but rather seek out the desirable end which is a sanctification of the heart from the reminded of the work of the Lamb of God, in which God is most glorified.

And I wish to see that. In myself and in my church. I want to see the Lord Jesus Christ glorified in whatever we do just as the chapter before 1 Corinthians 11 so mightily exhorts the christian man to do.

]]> http://alexyi.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/communion-take-it-seriously/feed/ 0 alexyi http://alexyi.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/constituted-means/ http://alexyi.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/constituted-means/#comments Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:54:58 +0000 alexyi http://alexyi.wordpress.com/?p=421 ]]>

This is the best thing I have read in a while.

A fanatic is somebody seeking desirable ends but ignoring constituted means. Seeking to get out of the religious rut is a desirabel end. It is right and it is in the will of God. But trying to do it in a manner that is not according to God’s constituted means is all wrong and gets us nowhere.

… some people try getting worked up psychologically.

… some people try group dynamics.

What is needed is some old-fashioned, salty horse sense. I am sure there are 189 mules in the state of Missouri that have more sense than a lot of the preachers who are trying to teach people how to get the blessing of God in some way other than by the constituted means. When you get people all broken up, dabbing at their eyes and shaking, what is the result? It does not bring them any closer to God. It does not make them love God any better, in accordance with the first commandment. Nor does it give any greater love for neighbors, which is the second commandment. It does not prepare them to live fruitfully on earth. It does not prepare them to die victoriously, and it does not guarantee that they will be with the Lord at last.

A.W Tozer Rut, Rot, or Revival

God provides intelligence and means to procure a desirable end.

Those two divinely constituted means is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and obedience to his Word.

The nike slogan makes a lot more sense now. Well, at least it’s better than a “show” of religiosity.