The Bruised Reed: Part I

"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth"

---Isa. 42:1-3

The above verse from Isaiah 42 supplies the premise of Richard Sibbes 1630 work The Bruised Reed. This book is an amazing read which has been highly praised throughout the last four centuries. Christian ministers from Richard Baxter in the 17th century to D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones in the 20th century have atested to its power.  

The two themes of the bruised reed and the smoking flax form the basis of the entire book. According to Sibbes exegesis of the Isaiah 42 passage, the bruised reed is the man in misery who sees sin as the cause of that misery. The smoking flax is the brusied reed who has the "spark of hope" from Christ but is still plagued by doubts and fears that are the result of his manifold corruptions. Sibbes argues that the bruising of man is necessary both before and after conversion. Before our conversion it is needed because, "Our hearts, like criminals, until they be beaten from all evasions, never cry for the mercy of the Judge" (pg. 4). Sibbes writes that bruising is needed after conversion, "so that reeds may know themselves to be reeds, and not oaks" (pg. 5). In all of this, Sibbes argues, bruising is a gracious work wrought by God. He exhorts us to remember in our bruising, "Let us lament our own perversity, and say: Lord, what a heart have I that needs all this, that none of this could be spared!" (pg. 12). We as Christians are not to fear bruising or wish that it never come upon us for only those who have been bruised and healed by Christ will find themselves in celestial glory with the Savior.

The smoking flax is the child of God who, after conversion, has a little grace mixed with much corruption. Christ will not quench this smoking flax however because, "this spark is from heaven: it is his own, it is kindled by his own Spirit. And secondly, it tends to the glory of his powerful grace in his children that he preserves light in the midst of darkness, a spark in the midst of the swelling waters of corruption" (pg. 20). Sibbes has much to say of this smoking flax. We should not be deceived into believing that we have not received grace because we are not as spiritually mature or as holy as others. "By false conclusions," Sibbes writes, "we may come to sin against the commandment in bearing false witness against ourselves" (pg. 35). We must be constantly reminded that we are not under the covenant of the law but rather the covenant of grace. This is a great truth for, "Moses, without any mercy, breaks all bruised reeds, and quenches all smoking flax. For the law requires personal, perpetual and perfect obedience from the heart, and that under a most terrible curse, but gives no strength. It is a severe task master, like Pharaoh's, requiring the whole tale of bricks and yet giving no straw. Christ comes with blessing after blessing, even upon those whom Moses had cursed, and with healing balm for those wounds which Moses had made" (pg. 36). 

TO BE CONTINUED...





UPDATES SOON

UPDATES ARE FORTHCOMING!!!

I have been really busy at work and seminary has swamped me as of late. Fret not though for I have three more books to review and I hope to write the reviews soon. The titles are Indwelling Sin by John Owen, The Bruised Reed by Richard Sibbes, and The Letters of Samuel Rutherford.

Soli Deo Gloria!

A Quest for Godliness by J.I. Packer (Part III)

John Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ was a polemical work against Arminianism written in the year 1647 (five years after Owen's first polemic on Arminianism). Below are some of the salient points that I garnered about this work from J.I. Packer's work A Quest for Godliness.

Notes on John Owen's Polemic on Arminianism

A discussion on the extent of the atonement (who is saved thereby) leads to a further discussion on the nature of the atonement (what did Christ accomplish thereby).

• The idea of universal salvation finds only rebuke when confronted with Scripture which leaves only two possible implications; either Christ died in accordance with the Father's will to actually purchase the salvation of some (particular redemption) or Christ died to make it possible for any person to be saved who believes in Christ of their own libertarian free will (general redemption). Since Scripture asserts that Christ's work on the Cross was effective, the latter implies that Christ failed in effecting the actual salvation of anyone because only the possibility of salvation was purchased on the Cross. Owen sees this implication as derogatory and blasphemous to a God who accomplishes everything in His purpose.
• Arminianism asserts that, "if faith and unbelief are to be responsible acts, they must be independent acts" (Packer, 137). Arminianism, described as a semi-pelagian works-based salvation masquerading under a different name, says that we save ourselves by accepting the salvation that Christ made possible on the Cross. This has a remarkably negative implication when one tries to understand justification by faith. As Packer writes, "What we say comes to this--that Christ saves us with our help; and what that means, when one thinks it out, is this--that we save ourselves with Christ's help" (Packer, 137).
• The old gospel that Owen preaches is not only as full and free an offer of salvation as the Arminian version but it is the most edifying gospel because it finds its power in the absoluteness of God's sovereignty which fully highlights the true nature of God's mercy.
• The Arminian doctrine of a universal divine saving purpose (general redemption) has two more negative implications and here I will use Packer's words at length because I think it might be his best passage on the topic. 

  "The first is that it compels us to misunderstand the significance of the gracious invitations of Christ in the gospel of which we have been speaking; for we now have to read them, not as expressions of the tender patience of a mighty Sovereign, but as the pathetic pleadings of impotent desire; and so the enthroned Lord is suddenly metamorphosed into a weak, futile figure tapping forlornly at the door of the human heart, which he is powerless to open. This is a shameful dishonor to the Christ of the New Testament. The second implication is equally serious; for this view in effect denies our dependence on God when it comes to vital decisions, takes us out of his hand, tells us that we are, after all, what sin taught us to think we were--masters of our fate, captain of our souls--and so undermines the very foundation of man's religious relationship with his Maker" (Packer, 143).

A Quest for Godliness by J.I. Packer (Part II)

This installment of my reading reflections deals with Chapter 8 in Packer's book A Quest for Godliness.  The title of this chapter is "Saved by His Precious Blood: An Introduction  to John Owen's The Death of Death in the Death of Christ." This chapter was the most profound for me personally because it was a scathing rebuke of the Arminian theology so present in modern day evangelical Christianity; a problem that was equally present in the 17th century England of John Owen.

An incomplete outline with quotes and some of my own reflections:

• The old gospel, which consisted in the unconditional election of totally depraved sinners for salvation by the sovereign grace of God, was a God-centered gospel.  The new gospel, which consists of conditional election of almost totally depraved sinners for salvation based upon the free-will of man, is a man-centered gospel. Calvinism (the old gospel) and Arminianism (the new gospel) are very similar in a myriad of points.  That being said, in the words of Packer, "a half-truth masquerading as a whole truth becomes a complete untruth. Thus, we appeal to men as if they all had the ability to receive Christ at any time; we speak of his redeeming work as if he had done no more by dying than make it possible for us to save ourselves by believing; we speak of God's love as if it were no more than a general willingness to receive any who will turn and trust; and we depict the Father and the Son, not as sovereignly active in drawing sinners to themselves, but as waiting in quiet impotence 'at the door of our hearts' for us to let them in" (Packer, 126-127).
• This is a brutal critique of Arminianism. This belief, by thinking it is affirming the love of God through the idea of a general atonement, has undermined the sovereignty of God (also taught in Scripture) and as a result has jettisoned the true love of God. In effect, they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. The love of God demonstrated in the gospel is not that Christ paid for the sins of all men but rather that he paid for the sins of all His chosen sheep. One need only read John 10, Romans 9, or Ephesians 1 to understand that God's glory is manifested specifically in saving undeserving sinners who are incapable, by their nature, of saving themselves.  

•  Packer next gives a quick overview of Arminian and Calvinistic theology.
• Arminianism believes (among other things): 
• Man is never totally corrupted by sin to the point that he cannot receive the gospel.
• Man can resist the call of the Holy Spirit.
• Election is based on God's foreknowledge of man's free-will decisions.
• The atonement did not save anyone in particular but made it possible for the salvation of all.
• Man can fall from a state of grace and the assurance of salvation by failing to keep themselves in faith.

•  Calvinism believes (among other things):
• Man is totally depraved by sin and thus unable to come to God of his own free-will.
• Election is based on God's sovereign, unconditional choice of sinners to be redeemed by Christ.
• The atonement did save each of God's elect in particular.
• The Holy Spirit never fails in his mission of bringing the elect to Christ.
• The saved can be assured of their final salvation because it rests on the power and supremacy of God.

• Packer, noting that the famous "five points of Calvinism" were simply a response to the five-point Arminian work known as "The Remonstrance", explains how myopic the five points of Calvinism are in relation to the overall theology of Calvinism.
• Calvinism is much broader than the five points.
• While the five points present Calvinist soteriology in a negative form, Calvinism is at its core a expository and pastoral theology.
• The five points tend to distract from the "organic character" of Calvinistic thought on soteriology.
• Calvinism's central soteriological point is simply that God saves sinners.
• The five points obscures the wide gulf between Arminian and Calvinistic soteriology.
• The Arminian sees the following formula: my faith resulted in my election.
• The Calvinist sees the following formula: my election resulted in my faith.
• Arminian theology says that the cross makes salvation possible whereas Calvinism says that the cross actually saved.
• While the five points were initially formulated as a response to Arminian doctrine, Calvinism predates Arminianism. That is because Calvinism, though named for the great reformer, is nothing more than the biblical gospel.  As C.H. Spurgeon would state, "That doctrine which is called 'Calvinism' did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth." I think the most brutally accurate critique of Arminianism in the book comes on this point. Packer states:
• "Certainly, Arminianism is 'natural' in one sense, in that it represents a characteristic perversion of biblical teaching by the fallen mind of man, who even in salvation cannot bear to renounce the delusion of being master of his fate and captain of his soul" (Packer, 133).

To be continued...(next time we will continue with John Owen's critique of Arminianism in his polemical work "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.")

A Quest for Godliness by J.I. Packer (Part I)

My first book review is not actually one by a Puritan but rather one about the Puritans. A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life is the culmination of over thirty years of study and research on the part of famed theologian J.I. Packer. Packer credits the Puritans with convincing him of the nature of sin and the need of its mortification, the ubiquity of God's sovereignty in Scripture, the need for meditation, a vision of pastoral ministry, the transitory nature of life on Earth, the essence of renewal in the church, and the link between theology and spirituality. This was the book that truly lit the fire of my interest in the Puritans and I will briefly summarize some of the key points I gleaned from Dr. Packer.

Why We Need the Puritans

1. They were mature about their faith in a way that is lacking in our day and age.
2. Puritanism was a spiritual movement that was profoundly God-centered.
3. Puritans demanded a theological, and not pragmatic, justification for everything that they did.
4. Packer elaborates on three groups of Christians that could particularly benefit from practical Puritan theology. Packer labels these three groups as restless experientialists (seekers of experiences rather than rationality) , entrenched intellectualists (zealots with little warmth or grace), and disaffected deviationists (those who feel disillusioned, let down, or left-behind).

The Puritans and Scripture

1. Puritanism was a Bible movement at its core.
2. The Puritans were competent exegetes of Scripture and they exegeted for applicative purposes.
3. Puritan approaches to accurate Scriptural interpretations: they sought to interpret Scripture...
•  literally and grammatically
• consistently and harmonistically
• The plain must be used to interpret the obscure
• "Peripheral ambiguities must be interpreted in harmony with fundamental certainties."
• doctrinally and theocentrically
• Scripture is doctrine
• Scripture is God, not man, centered
• christologically and evangelically
• Christ is the sum of the whole Bible
• experimentally and practically
• with a faithful and realistic application
• The six questions to ask when interpreting Scripture in the Puritan method:
• What do these words actually mean?
• What light do other Scriptures throw on the text? How does it fit in the biblical revelation?
• What truths does it teach about God and man's relationship to Him?
• How are these truths related to the saving work of Christ?
• For what practical purpose does this text stand in Scripture?
• How do these truths apply to me and others? What are they telling us to believe and do?

To be continued...