I hope we can continue the conversation on the past post. It's raining here, and it's supposed to be that way for the next week. I would build an ark, but i'd like to see how many animals i could fit into my canoe. I've finally forced myself to eat most of the ice cream from the bucket i bought a month ago. I got a vanilla/chocolate mix because i wasn't sure which i liked better, but the last time i opened the bucket there was only vanilla left. Guess i solved that one-chocolate.
I caught myself in a disturbing thought a minute ago. I was looking for my Spurgeon's "Morning and Evening," and found it where it usually is-next to the bed. My thought in exact words was "I love being able to wake up and see Spurgeon laying next to me." That thought didn't form quite right, but i knew what i meant. Speaking of that subject, did you know there was a Charles Spurgeon honeymoon suite in Indiana? You can look it up online. I'm thinking about changing plans from Yellowstone next summer to the Spurgeon honeymoon suite, but it might feel kinda weird. There's a huge picture of Spurgeon on the wall, and his eyes follow you around the room.
I'm reading Acts at the moment and have a question about Acts 8. What are verses 12-17 saying about baptism and the Holy Spirit? I'm assuming a lot of it has to do with gifts, since there can't really be baptism without grace, and grace without the Holy Spirit. Odd. And if you're really ambitious i need some help with Calvin's commentary about the laying on of hands that he puts in with this section of scripture. "the Church was beautified for a time only with these gifts; whereupon it followeth that the laying on of hands...had an end when the effect ceased." What, laying on of hands is dead? Hyper-cessationism?
I started this blog to give updates on life, to share in searching and submitting to Christ and God’s Word, and thoughts about books, theology, chasing squirrels, and other things. “For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.” Colossians 1:19-20
6 comments:
Lickel,
Well, I hope when you are married you like Joanna next to you more than Spurgeon...but I'm not too sure.
Good thoughts on Acts. It's interesting because the event itself is simple but the interpretation is very difficult. I don't know that I can add much to your thoughts, but I will try.
I think it is important to read this verse in the context of the whole of Acts. Remember Christ's commission to the Apostles in Acts 1, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria," (vs 8). Then here in Acts 8 we have the evangelist Philip proclaiming Christ in Samaria (8:5). I *think* we could see Acts 8 as God fulfilling his promise of 1:8, and the fulfillment of this promise is marked with the outpouring of the Spirit. It is not as if the believers didn't have the Spirit, but this event is marked with an incredible outward visible sign, representing a great development in the Church. The Apostles (Peter and John) are sent to signify that it is officially through the Apostles God approved of this new development of the Church, after all it is through their witness that Christ seeks to establish his Church. Just as on the day of Pentecost God affirmed his presence by an overwhelming outpouring of the Spirit affirming that development in the Church, so we see God doing the same thing here in Samaria, and this affirmation came through the Apostles, not Philip. Anyway those are some thoughts by way of introduction, again, it's not an easy passage to interpret, I would LOVE to hear what a true Charismatic would say.
As to Calvin's commentary I'm not sure on his view of Spiritual gifts. What I think Calvin is rightly degrading is the Catholic view of Confirmation. Rome thinks that confirmation is a sacrament and that it consists of laying on of hands to give grace to those they do it to. They maintain that because the Apostles did it they should too. Clearly Calvin was not into Rome's idea of sacraments (and no one should be). And so this sign and the thing signified in the laying on of hands is not a means of grace, it was for a particular time and place. But we should probably read that in the light of Rome's teachings (you know Rome...the great beast mentioned in Revelation?)
Thanks Kyle. I think we should ask charismatic apostle C.J. Mahaney what he thinks about this section of Acts 8. Wow, i'd love to pick his brain, and i wouldn't argue with him. I understand what Calvin is saying about confirmation and laying on of hands as a means of grace. It is so important to guard baptism and the Lord's Supper as the two sacraments and as ordinary means of grace. Maybe a new post is needed, but how did we ever come to the idea that the purpose of these sacraments is to be an external show to others of our life in Christ?
"external show to others." I wouldn't say that the visible sign of the sacrament is not primarily for others, though I think it could be argued from James 2 that they are to a degree. Rather, the visible sign signifies the internal grace given to us when the Sacraments are taken and realized in faith (Romans 4). In this case it is a very individual thing that we enjoy very corporately.
Yeah, i should have clarified a bit, but i didn't want to dwell on a new topic. Oh well. I meant to address something i hear over and over about baptism in particular and communion as well, that "the purpose of baptism is a declaration of faith before a congregation." Without getting into a credo/paedo argument, it seems that many are confused when we say baptism is a means of grace and a work of God rather than something done by men to prove their allegiance to an audience. I like Romans 4, and think we can see baptism as a sign and a seal of the covenant and enjoy they sign together with others. Can James 2 really be taken to be addressing the sacraments? Maybe i need to reread your blog on this before i ask any more questions, but at first glance it can't be the case that works=sacraments. Faith without sacraments is dead? Faith without sacraments is useless? Please correct my error in understanding.
Rather, what I was saying is that the visible sign applied to a person can be seen as a proclamation of faith before people. The justification that James is talking about is not the justification before God but rather one which is before men. This justification before men seems to be vindicated by works. When a grown man becomes a believer he is baptized. Both as a sign of the inward grace but also as a public identification with Christ. In this way, the sacrament, baptism, may serve to publicly justify you as a Christian. James 2 does not refer to sacraments but to the good works we do before men. Is that a bit clearer? That's where my line of thinking was stemming from.
Post a Comment