Antioch Agent

Exodus 39:30 And they made the plate of the holy crown of pure gold, and wrote upon it a writing, like to the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS TO THE LORD.

The priestly garments for Aaron were an ensemble of carefully crafted materials. When you imagine the ephod, the shoulder pieces, the girdle, the breastplate, the chains and rings, the robes (with the hems stringed with pomegranates and bells) to the coats of fine linen, in all it’s intricate details.. it certainly must have been quite a sight to see Aaron being fully adorned in it’s glorious colorful array. The the last and final logical piece that the priest was to put on must have been the mitre. It was the crowning glory of the high priest. The thing that struck me most about the whole attire were those words in the uppercase, “HOLINESS TO THE LORD”.

The Old Testament priesthood system pointed to importance of one to represent man before God. This being a shadow of better things to come, we know that Christ is our great high priest that represents His people before God. Wonderfully, we know that Christ was not after the order of Aaron, but rather of Melchizedek of which was said in Hebrews 7:3 “Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.” Aaron and his sons had to sacrifice animals for their own sins because they were sinful men, but not our Lord. Our Lord went into the holy of holies and offered up the sacrifice to take away the sins of the world. He did this by shedding His precious blood and offering up a sacrifice totally acceptable to God. Our Lord Jesus, our great high priest represents us as an advocate, perfect and holy before the Lord and continues His glorious ministry of intercession.

As Christ our high priest was the embodiment of “Holiness unto the Lord” what impressed upon me was what manner of priest am i? In respect to my thought life (since it is worn on the head) how am i doing? The crown was made of pure gold. That speaks of it’s value and it’s composition. If i were to put a value on my thought life and ascertain what it consists of what would it be worth? Next, there were words engraved upon it. What words or thoughts are engraved in my memory and mind? Are they worthless, sinful and displeasing to Him or are they glorifying and holy? Next, it was inscribed “Holiness to the LORD”. It is holiness not to myself or to others but with respect to God, the one who’s very being is holy. It is to be judged by His standards of holiness, not any others… especially mine. Is my thought life, even close to such an inscription? * groan*

These words are instructional “Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. ” 1Peter 1:13-16.

It is ‘because it is written’, just as it was on the mitre, and even in this passage (referring to the OT) that desiring to be holy is not to be an option for the saint.

Oh Lord, please make me like Thy Son. Help me with this ever raging battle in my mind and struggle to be holy.

(Continued … )It is for this very reason that i desire to pen my thoughts on this very vast subject and to put down in words the very theological questions that have plagued me. The very questions that i believe that all sincere believers have struggled with at one point of time in varying degrees. Now, I must emphatically state early on, that many better, many more learned, many more eloquant, many more spiritual men than I, would disagree with some of views here (perfectly understandable). I have a great deal of respect for my fellow brethren who are Calvinist and I am continually encouraged by their zeal for God’s word and to hold fast to it. I have (and still continue to) learned many things from them. However, i must graciously decline in embracing certain aspects of their doctrine where i am persuaded differently in scripture. Therefore, i ask for an open heart and mind as we work to consider and revisit the ‘doctrines of grace’ as taught by the Reformed school of higher thought.

Every side of the theological camp is prone to accuse the other of imposing their viewpoints into the bible and not exegeting correctly. That is understandable. Therefore may it be stated from the onset, that it is not my desire to stir up contention, but to merely remind all of us that we must be like the Bereans who “..were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” Acts 17:11. Every side would quote the same verse and hold on to the same principles. Therefore, we must let scripture be the yard stick while at the same time not decline to hear the counsel of many godly men who have represented the different views. Also, though creeds, confessions, systems of theology may be of great value to us, they must be put under the same scrutiny and test. One of the tests is, “Is this consistent with the rest of scripture?”. It is a good hermeneutic to let scripture interpret scripture.

I am fully aware, that although some of the points that are discussed may hit at the some very raw nerves, it is necessary to be honest enough to challenge ones theological mindset (no matter how strong it is right now) and hold it under the scrutiny of scripture. I continue to learn, and have had to eat humble pie many times. I too am just coming out of what i have described as a position i held on for many many years (although not fully understanding the ramifications of it back then). It has always been my principle, that if shown soundly from scripture, that i would graciously abide to follow it. That’s what the learning process is all about. This has always been the case for every honest Christian, even as God breaks down our walls of pride and resistance by His convicting power. I pray that for all of us, we will not be won over “..with enticing words of man’s wisdom” (1 Cor 2:4) but just as Paul himself declared in 1 Cor 2:13 “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.” We too will be led to the truth by the Spirit as we compare spiritual things with spiritual. We must not be taken up by eloquence or smooth speech, but by plain reasoning from scripture. May the Lord lead and illumine His truth in our hearts under the guidance of the Spirit.

So, let me assert that i believe there must be a balance in understanding the sovereignty of God and human responsibility. Leaning too far onto any one side will invariably lead to all sorts of problems. The bible holds both truths to be true.

I fully believe in the total sovereignty of God; that God is Almighty, and as ruler over His creation and His subjects, is in complete control of all things. Nothing goes beyond His scope and knowledge, and in His omnipotence and omniscience and omnipresence, He has the full right as do as He wishes and does so for His good pleasure and glory. On the other hand, scripture clearly shows that God has sovereignly given man a will to choose. That man has a real will (though tainted by sin and the fall) to respond or to reject God’s offer of salvation, is clearly emphasized throughout the pages of holy writ. Men does have a responsibility because God has already done everything possible to remove the obstacles for men to come to him. The condition is clear, simple faith in God and His truth as revealed in His Son.

These things, we intend to discuss as time progresses unless the Lord returns sooner.

Over the past many months, i have been revisiting some matters concerning the very core teachings of the scripture regarding the sovereignty of God. A couple of years ago, when i discovered the teaching on the sovereignty of God through listening to many sermons preached and as i read (and reread) Johnathan Edwards’ “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” and Arthur Pink’s “The Sovereignty of God”, i was convinced that the answer to all my hardest theological questions lay in the phrase “God is sovereign” (as taught by the Reformed viewpoint).

I was drawn to the legacy of what i believed the Reformation stood for (sola gratia, scriptura, fide .. etc) and because of my rejection of the false Catholic doctrine of salvation by works that it stood for. Thus after reading the passages for myself and being convinced of the Reformed interpretation, i resigned to it and my heart lay to rest every doubt, and it (as Edwards put it) was to me “an exceeding pleasant, bright, and sweet doctrine.” It remained clearly logical and sweet, as the result of my understanding of the Total depravity of man left me totally convinced that since salvation is a work of God from start to finish, that there was no real place for a human free will. I believed humanity lost that right when Adam and Eve fell and we were plunged into sin and ruin. Simple. All this time, i didn’t delve deeper to find out what the whole system essentially needed me to assent to, as is the case with many others.

The reason for my inquiry was sparked by an invitation for me to speak on a topic which touched on the Calvinistic point of Unconditional election. As i read through the notes provided by those who invited me, which were based on the Westminster Shorter Cathechism, what i thought was a simple and (used to defend strongly as indisputable) turned into a full blown investigation of some very fundamental doctrines. I spent desperate and countless hours, studying and searching God’s word and consulting many other resources. I am still not done with it (nor believe i can ever be) but i have now come to a clearer conclusion on the subject.

As a result of my enquiry, i had to (by sheer weight of conscience to God’s word) humbly change my once held fortress of what was my once perceived unshakeable stability. In my high mindedness, I was brought to my knees and was literally in tears as i once again rediscovered in the wee hours of one dark morning, the full edged power of the eternal words in John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” The glorious light of the gospel shone in my heart once again in all it’s radiance. It’s universal reach and implications could not be denied.

Most of us as evangelicals, by default, think we should be in either one of this 2 camps; Calvinistic or Arminian. And since I believed that bible clearly teaches eternal security and did not believe that one could lose his salvation, i thus at the back of my mind naturally aligned myself to the Calvinist position (while never labeling myself a Calvinist). Visiting the 5 points of Calvinistic doctrine encapsulated in the acronym “TULIP” for myself in serious study (after many years of apparently agreeing with it), i was shocked to hear about the conclusions of this system of theology. Suddenly, i understood what was the under current of it and I staggered as i discovered how so much of it went in direct opposition with God’s revealed nature about Himself and the very truths of the gospel.

When you decide to embrace TULIP, you have to take the whole flower… leaf, stalk and petal. Whole sale. Even leading Calvinists state that each point necessarily follows the other and if you reject one, you have to necessarily reject all. Denouncing one would rend the whole system apart, because the logic across each of the 5 points are so intricately twined. The thing that really got me severely agitated was with very center of the system the “L” (which stands for Limited atonement). And thus i was confronted all over again with the very question that perplexed Edwards initially, which he said “It used to appear like a horrible doctrine to me” and what Calvin himself ironically described as a”..horrible doctrine of divine election..”

Discovering that Calvinism claimed that Christ did not really die for the whole world but only for a select number of individuals and that God’s work of redemption was so called ‘limited’ , i was surprised. This stems from an extreme view of God’s Sovereignty, which seemed to violate God’s justice and love. In their well meaning desire to come up with a view that gives most glory to God, (this is noble effort), they have unfortunately done the very opposite. In overemphasizing the sovereignty of God, they lost sight of God’s clear revelation of His very unique character, His love (1 John 4:8,16).

to be continued ….