Incorruptible Seed

It continues to amaze and sadden me just how many so-called professing believers I run into or hear of who base their salvation in Jesus the Christ upon what is often expressed as, “Oh, I made a decision for Christ when I was young.” Yet, the vast majority of these with whom I am personally acquainted and who tell me this are caught up in besetting sins and are living like the devil himself. I am talking rampant sexual immorality or they are chronic liars and see nothing wrong with doing one or both of these sins while professing Christ as Lord and Savior.

Christ, in other words, has had NO impact upon their personal morality or ethics and their behavior betrays their profession of faith. Why is this so? Why is it that so many think that just because they prayed a prayer, raised a hand, walked an aisle, or signed a card in an evangelistic presentation that they are saved? That sounds good, right? What's wrong, if anything, with a scenario like that?

I can sum up the answer to those questions in one sentence:

“God has done all He can for you, now it is your turn.”

I have heard hundreds of variation of this; two are:

“God has done His part, now you must do your part.” … “Belief now is what God requires of you and that's all He expects as your part in this.”

And the list can go on and on.

A false, watered down, weak and emaciated gospel is presented in almost every professing evangelical church around the world. An appeal is made to man as if he or she had the ability to make a righteous decision to come to Christ. The results of this message are the shipwrecked lives so dominant in evangelical churches today.

Besides having no real sense of the crushing weight of their sin in their “decision for Christ,” no conviction, there is no understanding of the high calling of the believer in Christ. There is no sense of the New Creature that has been planted into the souls of True believers.

Listen to this:

“Therefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and rest your hope fully upon the grace that is to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; as obedient children, not conforming yourselves to the former lusts, as in your ignorance; but as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it is written, “Be holy, for I am holy.” ” (1 Peter 1:13-16)

This is what a valid profession of faith should look like: 1) Resting your hope fully upon the unmerited favor of God; 2) Resting as obedient children; 3) Not walking as we did when we were non-Christians in our former lusts; 4) Walking as holy New Creations because He who called us is Holy. Do not miss this last point: “...be holy in all your conduct, because it is written, “Be holy, for I am holy.”

The idea here is that if in all your conduct you are not walking as “holy New Creations” in Christ, then you cannot profess to be a Christian. (Gal. 2:20; 2 Cor. 5:17).

It would do the true believer good to keep his or her focus on the high calling of our new natures (New Creations) in Christ. We would fall less and grow more if we devoted our daily devotions less to physical needs and more to our spiritual ones. Take unto one's heart, thinking long and hard, that to be Regenerated, to be born again, is to have a new birth of an incorruptible, not corruptible, seed.

“having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever,” (1 Peter 1:23)

Do you see this? Someone born again, has had a spiritual re-birth, is of an incorruptible seed. If he or she lives as though he or she is of a corruptible seed, then a profession of faith in Jesus Christ cannot be made because He is that incorruptible seed.

We have to understand this calling if we are to be Christians and live like we are Christians. We cannot deny in word, thought, or deed that we are of (born again) an incorruptible seed and then not live as though we are. This we must keep in the forefront of our hearts if we are really born again.

We have to “carry ourselves,” in our conduct, as someone from a high and regal calling, heavenly speaking. In the world, we must, we have no other choice, to live as someone who is not “of the world.” As believers, we must live as though, and we are, of another world—heaven. As those distinguished by and in Sovereign Grace, we must—no alternative—live as holy princes and princesses of the King of kings and Lord of lords.

“It would be well if, in the spirit of humility, we recognized the true dignity of our regenerated nature, and lived up to it … Let the dignity of your nature, and the brightness of your prospects, O believer in Christ, constrain you to cleave unto holiness, and to avoid the very appearance of evil. ” (C.H. Spurgeon)

How Does God Speak Today?

My wife and I have this friend. She is bright, in her 40's, but not formally educated in systematic theology or Biblical Studies. Yet, when in a woman's Bible study where she was asked, “How does God speak to you?” she responded correctly, “He speaks to me through His Word by means of the Holy Spirit.” Well, you would have thought from the responses she got that she had uttered absolute blasphemy. The participants proceeded to inform her that God speaks to them all the time and in various ways and that our friend should not be so “black and white.”

Of the many foundational truths of the Reformation, one that has to do with the above paragraph and the point of this article is that the Word of God is the absolute authority source for faith and practice.

“The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Ephesians 2:20; Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Psalms 19:1-3; Hebrews 1:1; Proverbs 22:19-21; Romans 15:4; ) ” (London Baptist Confession; Chapter 1; #1)

The above quote from the LBC has been one that has given definition to the Reformed movement for centuries and indeed has been a central component to professing Evangelicalism. But note I said “...indeed has been...”

Though the LBC represents my personal conviction regarding Divine revelation, there has been a change floating about in theological circles that has worked itself into the hearts and minds of professing Evangelical for some time now. Some are now offering a new understanding of the Word of God, which says God now speaks to believers apart from and in addition to the Bible. It is an attempt by some to change the historically orthodox view of the “sufficiency and finality of Holy Scripture (R. Fowler White).”

Even a former professor at Dallas Theological Seminary wrote:

“In order to fulfill God’s highest purposes for our lives we must be able to hear his voice both in the written word and in the word freshly spoken from heaven. . . ”

Don't miss this point here. If this former Dallas Theological Seminary professor is correct, then those of us who adhere to the theology of the Reformation that the Word of God is our one and only authority for faith and practice are not only wrong but are also quenching the Holy Spirit.

Essentially, what these folks are suggesting is that God speaks to His people as He always has when He would deliver Truth to the prophets in supernatural means and extra-written: Burning bushes, handwriting on the walls, and talking donkeys are some examples.

So, are these guys like our seminary professor friend right? I do not think so.

What these advocates fail to realize and acknowledge is that in the days in which God did speak to His people through supernatural and other means, it was done in a time when little, if any, of the will of God was in written form. In those days, God's elect were forced out of necessity to rely on what they did have of God's will in written form plus other means. However, today we have a closed canon of Scripture and agree with ages of orthodoxy and orthopraxy that what we have in written form, the Bible, is our sole source and therefore the only authority for faith and practice. And, how and why do we affirm this?

“But why does the church affirm that the canon is closed? The only demonstrable basis for this affirmation is that God’s giving of revelation, spoken and written, is always historically joined to and qualified by God’s work of redemption. Now that God has accomplished salvation once-for-all, in Christ, He has also spoken His word, once-for-all, in Christ and in those whom Christ authorized and empowered by His Spirit (Heb. 1:1-2; 2:3, 4; Matt. 16:15-19; John 14:26; Eph. 2:19, 20). With the completion of salvation in Christ comes the cessation of revelation. Consequently, the church now lives by a "Scripture only" principle of authority To tamper with this principle invites a host of theological and pastoral problems. The proof of this observation can be seen in the effect of these "prophecies" upon many who are being led far afield from the sufficiency of the gospel itself. Its finality and complete sufficiency is, in reality, subtly assaulted by these claims to modern prophecies. ” (R. Fowler White)

In addition, the Word of God itself gives us no indication that He speaks to His elect through anything other than the Holy Spirit illuminating our hearts and minds through the Bible. What those who believe otherwise do when they say that God speaks to them through supernatural and extra-biblical means is detract and distract from the all sufficiency of Holy Scripture and how exactly is that extra-orthodox position not “quenching the Spirit?” (R. Fowler White)

My opinion is that they are doing exactly that, “quenching the Spirit,” in their advocacy of extra-biblical revelation. That's just how serious this issue really is. It is God's Word, Holy Writ, in which God's elect hear His words and receive guidance by the illumination of the Holy Spirit through His written Word.

“The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, 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 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 John 5:9 ) (London Baptist Confession; Chapter 1; #4)

Of Repentance Unto Life and Salvation - 1689 LBC - 1

Such of the elect as are converted at riper years, having sometime lived in the state of nature, and therein served divers lusts and pleasures, God in their effectual calling giveth them repentance unto life. ( Titus 3:2-5 )

Whereas there is none that doth good and sinneth not, and the best of men may, through the power and deceitfulness of their corruption dwelling in them, with the prevalency of temptation, fall into great sins and provocations; God hath, in the covenant of grace, mercifully provided that believers so sinning and falling be renewed through repentance unto salvation.
( Ecclesiastes 7:20; Luke 22:31, 32 ) 

Do We Have a Reliable Word of God or a Bible Fully of Holes?

In 1973, after high school graduation, a buddy and I drove from Kansas City, Kansas to spend the summer in San Bernardino, Californian at the then Arrowhead Springs Headquarters of Campus Crusade for Christ. We had enrolled in their Institute of Biblical Studies summer program and would spend most of the summer there studying before heading off to the pursuit of our academic degrees at the University of Kansas.

I can still remember the shock my friend and I both felt when we got to the point in the theology course when the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy was discussed. The instructor made a statement to the effect that, “Only the original autographs or manuscripts were inspired and without error and that the copies of the Greek and Hebrew texts and subsequent translations we have today are not.” I felt like I had been slammed with a brick. After the class I thought that a nice cot with an attending nurse was in order. So did my friend. We, however, survived.

The facts, we would learn, is that only the originals, that which was God breathed to the Apostles and Prophets, from the Old Testament through to the New, had the promise of inspiration and to be without error. The guarantee of 100% inspiration and without mistakes applies to the originals and not to the copies of the originals and translations. The self-attesting verses in the Bible to its accuracy applies to the original autographs. My “just-out-of-high school” reaction was a bit justifiable as I thought: “If the Greek and Hebrew texts from which all translations flowed were not without error and given by inspiration of God, then to what was I committing my life to as a believer? If I am commanded in Scripture to obey God’s Word, walk by faith and not by sight, then are the commandments I am to obey reliable or not?” –a dilemma worth considering.

I would go on to learn that through the seemingly endless copies of the original texts of Scripture something called “copyist errors” have most certainly crept into the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that exist today. However, these so-called mistakes, as well as other alleged “errors” do not affect the doctrine or history of redemption presented in the context of the passages in which they occur. A classic example is the numbering of King Solomon’s horse stalls in I Kings 4: 26 and in II Chronicles 9:25.

In the I Kings passage it is recorded that Solomon had 40,000 horse stalls while in II Chronicles it is stated that Solomon had only 4,000. Which is correct in this apparent contradiction? An answer commonly given is that I Kings records a different time than II Chronicles. At the beginning of Solomon’s reign he had 40,000 horse stalls while at the end of his reign he had in II Chronicles only 4,000. While convenient, it is more likely than not that this is a simple “copyist’s error.” There are issues other than “copyist errors” that creep into discussions on the inerrancy question.

Some alleged “discrepancies” might occur in situations in which details of an event might vary. In other words certain details in a biblical event might not be mentioned in another author’s account of the same event. What comes to mind are the following texts that seem to present a problem: 1) The account of Mary Magdalene and the Mary the mother of Jesus meeting one or two angels at Jesus’ tomb (Luke 23:55-24:9;John 20:1-2). And, 2) The blind man or men—two or one?—healed by Jesus at Jericho (Matthew 20:29-34, Mar10:46-52, and Luke 18:35-43).

But the point of the real existence of so-called and alleged “errors” exiting in copies of the originals is: Is what we have today reliable or so corrupted that it should be, as some have done, thrown out in the trash? The short and long answer is, no!

None of what constitutes discrepancies in the Bible constitute a contradiction. It is not like a writer of Scripture says in one place, “Christ rose from the dead,” while another writer in yet another places says, “Christ did NOT rise from the dead.” What we are talking about is something that appears to be an “error” and the explanation is not known. It is an “error” that can be explained, an “error” that is a simple leaving out of a zero or two, or an “error” that is simply a mystery that may or may not be explainable, ever. The solution to coming to a comfort zone with this is in the Science of Textual Criticism.

The discipline of Textual Criticism is one in which scholars are able to compare the copies with one another to determine the meaning of the original autographs. In the New Testament, for example, there are an amazing 24,000 copies entailing almost complete manuscripts to fragments. Through the painstaking process of comparing these copies to one another it could be discovered, for example, that one copy differs so greatly from the other thousands that scholars make the determination that a scribal addition was made to the text warranting an alert to study the variation more closely.

Another point in Textual Criticism is that in spite of the massive manuscript evidence of the New Testament so-called discrepancies are not what or as extensive as one might think. The difficulties generally are mere misspelled words, word order, some changed, added, or missing words. Depending on the source, scholars estimate a 99.5% accuracy rate to the originals found in the Greek manuscript copies. The alleged problems do not affect doctrine in the Old or New Testaments. And, the variations in the Greek or Hebrew manuscripts are mostly recorded in footnotes. This is also true in the better translations of the Bible.

We should take seriously the Doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy because as in any book, the Bible reflects the thoughts and intentions of its author. We can have confidence in the better translations we have from the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, even though we do not have the originals, that we have The Word of God. Scoffers would have us believe the texts of Holy Scripture has been so corrupted so as to be unreliable. This is hardly the case.

“Though inerrancy applies only to the original autographs, it does also apply to the Greek and Hebrew texts in this sense: the vast majority of verses in the Bible are not disputed…The vast majority are undisputed, the rest we're just unsure which one is the right reading (but no doctrine is changed in any case). God has indeed preserved His Word!” (Joseph A. Vusich; M.Div, Master’s Seminary)

###

RESOURCES

Christian Dating

Christian Music