Contemplating the Glory of God

Over the past several days I have been reflecting on the topic of God’s glory. More specifically, I have been thinking about how I sometimes tend to use terminology that quantifies the glory of God. For example, I will say things like, “such and such will bring more glory to God,” or “such and such a thing will bring less glory to God.” While that is familiar and acceptable terminology to use, I began to question whether that best fits with the understanding that Scripture supplies.

As a preliminary note, my logic is founded primarily on the doctrine of God’s immutability (the fact that God does not change) and, consequently, how that relates to His glory. Psalm 102:12, 25-27 paint an especially vivid picture of God’s eternality and immutability. The latter verses give an especially clear picture of the fact that while the things of the earth grow old and decay, God remains completely unchanged. Furthermore, Hebrews 13:8 clearly speaks of the fact, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”

Following from that, God’s glory should then be understood as a constant; God’s glory neither lessens nor increases based upon His creation else we might say that God is somehow affected by His creation. With that in mind, we must ask, “How then do we glorify God with our lives? If His glory cannot increase on account of my worship and obedience or my disobedience, why do my actions matter at all?”

I Corinthians 10:31 provides a good foundation for thinking through these things. In context, Paul is dealing with the issue of meat sacrificed to idols and whether or not it is okay for a believer to partake of such meats. Paul concludes that conscience should be the governing factor and that whatever conclusion one comes to, the Christian’s action should be motivated by thinking concerned with magnifying God’s glory. The passage does not, however, state that God’s glory is increased or decreased by the believer’s action. Ultimately, this passage deals with motivation and the intent of the individual believer.

Furthermore, Ephesians 1:3-14 is one of the clearest passages in Scripture regarding God’s glory in saving sinful men. Specifically, verses 4-6 declare that we have been chosen, predestined, and saved, “to the praise of the glory of His grace.” In verse 14, Paul uses the very similar phrase, “to the praise of His glory.” Those two phrases show that our salvation is a reflection of what God already is; it is the praising of the God who is glorious. He does not become glorious or more glorious by means of saving men, He demonstrates what He already is through salvation.

Now, to answer the question of how our actions matter to God’s glory, Scripture leads us to conclude that we are reflectors of God’s glory. One way to illustrate this is by considering the common mirror. The mirror does not and cannot generate any light or any image in and of itself. It is must reflect something else. The only thing inherent to the mirror’s ability to reflect the image is the quality or the cleanness of the mirror. A poor quality or dirty mirror distorts the image it reflects. In a similar way, human beings are reflectors of God’s image and glory (Gen 1:26-27; Eph 1:4-6, 14). The real questions each of us must ask are, “How do I reflect God’s glory and image to those around me? Is it an accurate reflection or am I guilty of distorting that image by the dirt of my own sinfulness and selfishness?” As I answer these questions, I am truly humbled by what I find to be true of myself.

In the end, the only way that we will be able to answer this question with a positive answer is by making sure that we are clean reflectors of God’s glory. We do so by being washed by the water of the Word and having our minds renewed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 5:26; Rom 12:1-2; Tit 3:4-5). In many ways, this understanding places a greater responsibility on our shoulders. We have been charged with reflecting the glory of the King, a glory of which we are merely stewards; let us take great caution in reflecting this glory lest we be found to be poor stewards.

The Prophets Themselves

The theme and office of the prophet stands as a very important part of the Scripture portrait. While the Old Testament contains three different words translated, “prophet,” there is one that stands out as being the most significant of the three. That words is, “nābhīʾ.”[1] According AMG’s Complete Word Study Dictionary the word is, “A masculine noun meaning a prophet, a spokesman. The meaning is consistently one of prophet and inspired spokesman” [emphasis added].[2] Scripture sets forth Moses as the greatest example of the Old Testament prophet. Scripture states, “But since then there has not arisen in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (Deut. 34:10).[3] Abraham is the only person to merit the title of “prophet” before Moses though it does seem to be somewhat less formal usage (Gen. 20:7).

Moses exemplified numerous characteristics that became the foundation of what a prophet is recognized to be. The first characteristic typified by Moses is that he was specifically called by God in the Arabian wilderness (Ex 3). Second, God promised that He would enable Moses to fulfill the things which God had called him to and God demonstrated Himself faithful to those things (Ex 3, 4, 14–16, 40:34-38). Most significantly, Moses was God’s mouthpiece to the people about the past present and future of Israel (Deut 1-3, 4:1, 26:18, 31:20-22). While there is certainly a little bit of latitude in this progression, the three major points establish a pattern that is followed by all subsequent prophets of God.[4]

The final section of the Old Testament Scriptures has come to be known as the “prophetic books.”While prophets are seen throughout the Scriptures, the latter part of the Old Testament is dedicated specifically to the messages of these great men. Furthermore, those books are divided into two sections which are commonly known as the “major prophets” and “minor prophets.” Such titles do not differentiate the importance of the messages that the prophets carried but rather the number of pages they occupy within the pages of Scripture.

While there is a great deal more that could be said about the office of prophet, it is time to turn to just one main point of application. The amount of Scripture dedicated to prophetic writings demonstrates the importance of their writings. The fact that God commissioned so many men to the office of prophet underscores the importance of their respective messages. Though Kent Hughes quotes one of Alistair Begg’s common sayings in a different context, it aptly applies. Begg states, “The plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things.”[5] In short, the prophet’s call is often God’s calling His people back to the “main things.”

---

[1] Brand, Chad Owen, Charles W. Draper, and Archie W. England Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, (Electronically Published: Bible Explorer 4), 2003, [Prophets].

[2] Baker, Warren, and Eugene E. Carpenter, The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament, (Electronically Published: Bible Explorer 4, 2003) [nāb̠iy’].

[3] Scripture references in this study are taken from the New King James Version,© 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.

[4] Baker, “The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament,” [nāb̠iy’].

[5] Hughes, R. Kent Hebrews: An Anchor for the Soul, (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 1993), 147.

A New Series: The Major Prophets

It has been quite some time since I have really had time for any writing outside of my school work. However, since I am now graduated I now have a little more time to pursue some of the topics that I would like to write about. In the past, most of my posts were what you might call “standalone.” I would now like to begin a series that will more continuity of thought and help to bolster big picture thinking. The primary reason for this endeavor is just to foster a bit of personal discipline in Bible study. No longer being in an environment of assignments and deadlines, I feel that a blog will help maintain focus and purpose in my study. It is my hope that my findings may be able to be a blessing to others who decide to follow along in this study and, as always, feedback is greatly appreciated.

The Morning Star of the Reformation

I have been studying the life of John Wycliffe and while I have not had time to write exclusively for my blog, I have decided to pass some of my research along simply because it has been a tremendous blessing to me. While it is easy to write history off as being somewhat boring, we must remember that it is our heritage. Everything that has meaning has meaning because of history. The people that are important to us as individuals hold a special place in our hearts, not because of the thin line of the advancing present but because of the history and memories we share with them. With that in mind, turn to history realizing that every figure in history was a living, breathing person just like we are. They had loved ones who were important to them just was we do; they wrestled with hard decisions and struggled to honor God with every breath they took just as we do. We now look back several centuries to consider a the man who started a movement that has brought us the God’s Holy Scriptures in the English language.

John Wycliffe is a well-known name in the scope of church history, both in the contexts of Bible translation and the Reformation. While Wycliffe did not actually live during the period of the Reformation, he is still considered highly influential to the Reformation in that many of the ideas he promoted became the battle cry of the Reformers, who came just over a 100 years later. The primary issues that drove Wycliffe were the Roman abuses of indulgences, justification by faith, and the strongest belief in the idea that every person should have a Bible in his or her own tongue. It was his daring stand against the Roman Catholic Church and his faithful work in translating the Bible that sparked a firestorm. Despite the preventative measures of the Roman Catholic Church, the English Bible quickly became established, thus making it impossible to uproot. By God’s great providence and the use of this humble man named John Wycliffe, the English Bible came, and it had came to stay.[1]

For that reason, Wycliffe has aptly been called “the Morning Star of the Reformation.”[2] The term is actually a biblical reference that appears only in three places (2 Pet 1:19; Rev 2:28, Rev 22:16) and carries with it absolutely beautiful imagery. In Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible, Barnes gives a tremendous summation of the imagery accompanying the term “morning star” and is quite fitting to insert here. He states,

The ‘morning star’ is that bright planet - Venus - which at some seasons of the year appears so beautifully in the east, leading on the morning - the harbinger of the day . . . It appears as the darkness passes away; it is an indication that the morning comes; it is intermingled with the first rays of the light of the sun; it seems to be a herald to announce the coming of that glorious luminary; it is a pledge of the faithfulness of God.[3]

Considering the imagery, it is easy to see why it has been applied to Wycliffe. In essence, he brought the first rays of the Reformation light; he heralded the coming of the glorious Scriptures; he stands as a pledge of God’s faithfulness in making Himself known to man. It could be said that such a saint of God could wish for no greater title . . . At the end of his life, Wycliffe suffered a massive stroke . . . he died on December 31, 1384 only three days later. Amazingly, he was never excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church. He passed on to meet the Lord by natural causes.[4]

While John Wycliffe passed away quietly in his bed, his accomplishments would ring in the ears of the Roman Church for years to come. David Hill gives an excellent concluding summary of Wycliffe’s life. He states, “It was symbolic that John Wycliffe died on the eve of a new year, for his life was the dawn of a new age. His voice was stilled, but the burning torch of freedom he lit burned on with an even brighter flame. . . . For the ‘Morning Star of the Reformation’ had lit a fire that could never be quenched.”[5]

---

[1] Brake, Donald L., A Visual History of the English Bible: The Tumultuous Tale of the World's Bestselling Book (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008), 46.

[2] Rawlings, Harold, Trial by Fire: The Struggle to Get the Bible into English, (Wellington, Fl: Rawlings Foundation, 2004), 33.

[3] Barnes, Albert, Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, (Electronic Edition: e-Sword 8.0.6, 2009), [Rev 2:28].

[4] Rawlings, Trial by Fire, 55.

[5] David C. Hill, Messengers of the King (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1968),  28.

Transformers 3: A Philosophical Mashup

I just had the opportunity to watch Transformers 3 with a couple of good friends. In keeping with the previous two movies, I could not recommend this movie on account of language, some suggestive humor, and some unnecessary immodesty. That brings me to the story itself which is . . . intriguing to say the least. I would like to note that I will sound like a complete nerd talking about all of the characters and elements of this story. I am, however, writing this not out of some obsession with science fiction; I am writing this with the hope of causing us (believers) to think about the way that the world programs our thinking even in what many of us might consider to be “neutral” ground. After all, how much of a worldview does an action-packed science fiction movie really have? That is a question that I will now try to answer.

As a preliminary note, this post contains a number of spoilers. You certainly do not need to see the movie to understand my perspective, but if you choose to watch the movie and want to enjoy the story as it unfolds, you might wait until after you see the movie to read this post.

That being said, I could not help but notice a number of glaring worldview conflicts. To give a brief but necessary synopsis of the story, the Autobots remain in their alliance with the humans helping them to deal with various national security threats, Deceptacon or otherwise. As the story progresses, it becomes apparent that the Decepatcons are far from defeated and now pose a greater threat than ever before. Through a series of intricately planned events, the Decepatcons successfully turn the humans against the Autobots resulting in the Autobots being exiled from earth. In keeping with their normal conduct, the Autobots warn the humans that the Deceptacons will not keep their bargain but peacefully accept the humans’ request and leave. The space vehicle carrying the Autobots is then destroyed by the Deceptacons as it is beginning to break Earth’s atmoshphere. After being rid of the Autobots, the Deceptacons unveil their real plan, just as the Autobots had warned, and begin their destructive takeover of Earth. It is only after the Deceptacons inflict incredible destruction that the Autobots return after narrowly escaping the shuttle. It is here that the Autobots make the key point that I would like us to focus on: humans will only see their plight after they have been ripped from their comfortable, self-indulgent lives. Though my synopsis is does not do the story justice, I believe that the point is sufficiently clear.

As I was watching, I could not help but think of our own country and how we are rushing toward our own destruction but refuse to see it due to our own hedonistic and pragmatic concerns. While our country marches down the path to international impotence, moral inversion, and economic death, its people willingly sit by in a haze of self-absorption. Such a degradation in society makes me wonder if Transformers 3 accurately depicts what a wakeup call really will entail. In many ways, such a depiction might make us think that a return to good ol’ fashion American values is what we really need but here is where the story really gets interesting.

The heroes of the story certainly do “the right thing” and stand up for freedom, stand up against the imminent tyranny and slavery. The flaw is that most of the heroes in this story are motivated by self-interest. The main character and hero, played by Shia LaBeouf, continually demonstrates an attitude of entitlement and self-exalting arrogance. Such an attitude from someone who is supposed to be a hero gives us quite the mashup of worldviews in that he makes some of the right choices for completely wrong reasons. Good heroes are supposed to be willing to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others, not so they can gain some skewed sense of self-worth.

Bringing those thoughts into the context of our own nation,the question that I find to be so thought-provoking is this: how many of us, in our patriotic attitudes, are motivated by similarly wrong motivations? Do we seek our freedom because we think that we have certain inalienable rights or entitlements (which are in reality merely privileges given by God)? Do we seek our freedom so that we may continue to heap to ourselves? Do we seek our freedom because losing that freedom would be ripping away the security blanket of affluence? That is not meant to come of as judgmental in any way but rather to provoke self-examination and make us think about why we so desperately desire the freedom that our Constitution has afforded to us. These are issues that I personally struggle with myself. I do not want to lose any of my freedoms but I have to ask why. Is it because I think that such a loss will inhibit my ministry or because it will just cause me some discomfort?

In the end, both types of people portrayed in Transformers 3 are self-absorbed and neither one reflects what a Christian should aspire to. In our Christian lives, everything that we pursue should be driven by a concern for others and the glory Christ alone. In that, we must always be conscious of the dangers that can happen by going to either extreme; we know that apathy and lethargy are wrong but we should also consider that zeal for the wrong reasons can be just as wrong even if the action itself is right. We do not want end up as the Pharisees who “cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence” (Matt. 23:25).

The Faith of a Father: A Profound Impact

This post comes at a unique time considering Father’s Day was only yesterday. In some ways, I hesitate to publish this now on account of the fact that I do not want it to be construed as just something that I have written in light of Father’s Day. These thoughts actually flow from a question that I have been pondering for a number of days. The question: who has had the single greatest impact upon your spiritual life and walk? As I pondered that question, I thought of a number of different people that have greatly impacted my thinking but when I narrowed it down to one single person, my father stood out as the single most influential.

To give a little background, my father is pastor so I was raised knowing nothing else. Through the years of sitting under his teaching I always respected him and what he taught, but I never really applied myself to learning the things that he was teaching. I believe that part of my attitude had to do with the fact that people always told me that I was going to end up being a pastor like my dad. Though I had a tremendous appreciation for my dad’s ministry, I did not want follow in his footsteps having seen firsthand the hardship and difficulty that comes with such a position. To make a long story short, the Lord ended up bringing me to see my own selfishness and through His leading I feel that God is calling me to pastoral ministry. In hindsight, I have realized how much I shortchanged myself by not paying attention to the teaching that was right in front of me. Nevertheless, the one truth I did not miss was how my dad always elevated Scripture as being the only absolute and source of truth.

That principle, though seemingly rudimentary, has been all but forgotten in the modern realm of ministry. As I have started to iron out various doctrinal issues and philosophies of ministry, I have tried very hard to study in a manner that is honest to Scripture and biased by nothing other than what is found in the text. I have always tried to ensure that my faith was not inherited, not built upon my father’s faith. At the same time, I recognize that such thinking has been the result of my dad’s influence in faithfully upholding Scripture as the only God-given standard for truth and conduct.

As I pondered my dad’s influence, I began to realize that he could not have given me anything of greater value. To instill in me anything more would have been to give me a foundation and a set of rules that was not my own and would have resulted in blind legalism, to instill in me any less would have been to leave me without bearing in a dangerous sea of conflicting and often Godless worldviews. As I have begun to come to some of my own convictions, I am starting to see what my dad has given me cannot led me astray because it always leads me back to the feet of my Lord. It is for that single principle that I will never be able to thank my father enough. It is now my goal to simply follow the challenge of II Tim. 3:14-15, “But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

Heartless?

I have heard some people say that a Reformed view of Scripture and the Gospel promotes an elitist, heartless, intellectual determinism. Though that can happen, I do not think that it is exclusive to a Reformed understanding of Scripture. Nevertheless, Reformed thinking is what I was thinking about this morning.

As I was driving to church, I was listening to an introduction to the White Horse Inn Discussion Group. They were recounting the inception of the group and the general intent of the group. One particular sound byte that they were talking about was from a show a number of years ago. It was a recording that they took while interviewing a number of professed believers. In the interview, they basically asked the question: can you describe the Gospel? As one might assume the answers were widely varied and every single person interviewed missed the point completely. That of course made the point of those on the panel of the White Horse Discussion Group and they went on.

Some time later, the White Horse Inn members heard about how that particular set of interviews impacted Dr. R. C. Sproul who was, at the time of the original airing, driving in his car. As he listened to people’s understanding, or lack thereof, of the Gospel, he became overwhelmed with sorrow; it was said that he actually had to pull his car to the side of the road as he wept over the lack of understanding that has so permeated Christianity at large. There are few men in Christianity that have such an incredible burden for people to know the truth about the one true God and Savior of men.

I think of my own life and I am shamed by that. In thinking about my past, I can recount breaking down in that type of anguish only over losing a dear friend or relative. I have not yet come to such a point of love for the truth that I weep when people do not comprehend or even care to comprehend it. In many ways, Dr. Sproul’s response almost makes me look like the one  who is heartless.

So then, I would ask: Does the example set by Dr. Sproul demonstrate a heartless, determinism? Have you ever been burdened for God’s truth to such a degree? Instead of criticizing the finer points of his theology, though they probably exist for most of us, let us (myself included) be challenged by his example; why don’t we cultivate the same kind of love for our God and Savior.