Do You Hate Me?

Thus far in our series Engaging the Homosexual Movement we have looked at arguments/objections from nature, morality and authority that might be raised in the interest of normalizing the practice of homosexuality. And we have offered Christian answers to each objection. Last time we began addressing another argument/objection that differs from the first three while simultaneously touching upon each. It is not so much an argument for the normalization of the practice of homosexuality as it is an objection against the God who condemns it. Given the truthfulness of the previous three answers, one might ask, “Does your God hate me?” In other words, does God hate those who approve of the practice of homosexuality? We concluded that the Bible’s answer to that question is complex. God hates those who approve of the practice of homosexuality, because their sin is a personal offense against his infinite greatness and goodness. But he also loves them in at least two senses. First, he loves them in a general providential sense. God provides for their temporal needs. As Jesus teaches in his sermon on the mount in Matt. 5:45, “He makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.” Second, he loves them in a salvific sense in that he freely offers life and salvation to them if they will repent and believe in Jesus Christ, and for all those he has foreordained to eternal life, he loves them by actually saving them from their sin.

A further objection might arise after delivering such an answer, viz. “Do you hate me?” In other words, if there is some sense in which your God hates those who approve the practice of homosexuality, does that mean there is some sense in which you hate me as well? As we will see, the answer to this question is also complex.

The Bible describes the church as hating the wicked and vice versa. Prov. 29:27 says, “An unjust man is an abomination to the righteous, but one whose way is straight is an abomination to the wicked.” Also, at least fifteen of the Psalms (5, 10, 17, 35, 58, 59, 69, 70, 79, 83, 109, 129, 137, 139, 140) are imprecatory prayers in which the psalmist calls out to God for the destruction of the wicked. Ps. 58:6-8 says, “O God, break the teeth in their mouths; tear out the fangs of the young lions, O LORD! Let them vanish like water that runs away; when he aims his arrows, let them be blunted. Let them be like the snail that dissolves into slime, like the stillborn child who never sees the sun.” David also says in Psalm 139:21-22, “Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against you? I hate them with complete hatred; I count them my enemies.” We see the same relationship between the church and the world in the New testament. Rom. 12:9b says, “Abhor (i.e. hate) what is evil; hold fast to what is good.” And 1 Jn 2:15-17 says, “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.” James 4:4 is similar. The text says, “You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” But perhaps the most shocking example of this teaching comes from Jesus’ own public ministry. In Luke 14:26-28 he teaches his disciples, saying, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it?” What does Jesus mean? He means that if we are to follow him we must learn to unreservedly love the things he loves and hate the things he hates regardless of our earthly relations. If we ever begin to treat any of our earthly relations, including our relation to self, as if it was more important, more foundational, than our relation to Christ, then we have left behind faithful Christian discipleship. So there is a sense, a very qualified sense, in which we are called to hate those who approve of the practice of sin, including ourselves when we discover ourselves sinning.

But the church is also called to love the world! Jesus teaches in Matt. 5:43-48, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?” And Rom. 12:14-21 says, “Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’ To the contrary, ‘if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”

So how is the church to simultaneously hate and love those who approve the practice of evil? We get an important clue in Rom. 12:19. The text says, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’” Here we see how our hatred for those who approve of the practice of wickedness should differ from God’s hatred of the same. God knows the heart infallibly and has the authority and ability to exact vengeance with perfect righteousness. The church does not. Now, it’s important to recognize that at this stage in the Apostle’s argument in Romans he is speaking to the church as the church and the way it and its members should relate to the world when it comes to matters of faith and practice. He is not speaking to every possible relationship a Christian might have within the world. For example, when Paul says “Never avenge yourselves,” he is not teaching pacifism. Individual Christians most certainly have the right to seek to punish evil doers in the world for the purpose of exacting reparations in the right circumstances. For example, Christians can serve in the military, as police officers, and practice self-defense. But the church as the church should not. The church as the church never enacts discipline as a merely punitive measure in the interest of exacting reparations. The church enacts discipline through its councils at local and regional levels in the interest of repentance and reconciliation. Church discipline is restorative. Furthermore, church authority is never compulsory or legislative; it is ministerial and declarative. That means the church, and Christians within the church, should confront the wicked with a gentleness and humility that wins them by repentance rather than with a harshness and overconfidence that pushes them away with contempt.

So how should the church’s hatred for the wicked be expressed? It should be expressed as a simple yet unwavering disapproval, grief, revulsion, and godly separation from the wicked. Rather than approving the practice of sin, we should disapprove it. Rather than rejoicing in wrongdoing, we should grieve over it and be repulsed by it. Rather than joining ourselves with those who practice wrongdoing in order to fellowship with them as if nothing were wrong with their beliefs and practices, we should maintain a proper degree of separation. This is how our hatred should manifest itself. It should never manifest itself as contempt or vengeance.

But what about loving our enemies? How should the church simultaneously love those who approve of the practice of sin? Our love for the wicked should be expressed in the same way God’s love is expressed. Jesus bases his teaching about loving our enemies on the character of the Father in Matt. 5:45, saying, “For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.” As we have seen, God loves the wicked in a general providential sense by providing for their needs. We should do the same. As Jesus says in Matt. 5:41-42, “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.” In other words, the command to love our neighbors is not limited by a religious litmus test. We should be ready and willing to show hospitality and mercy to our neighbors, providing for their basic needs as we are able, regardless of whether they approve of the practice of sin or not. Moreover, as we have seen, God loves the wicked in a salvific sense through the free offer of the gospel. We should participate in that love as well by inviting those who practice sin to repent and to believe in Jesus Christ, standing ready and willing to welcome any who would come to him. After all, we cannot know whether today’s Saul/Paul the Pharisee may not be tomorrow’s Saul/Paul the Apostle. The secret things belong to the Lord. 

In conclusion we might answer the question, “Do you hate me?” by saying, “Yes (in a very qualified sense) but, even more fundamentally, no. I hate you in the sense that I disapprove of, am grieved by, am revulsed by, and must maintain an appropriate degree of separation from you as long as you approve the practice of any sin, including homosexuality. But I love you in the sense that I am ready to show you hospitality and mercy as my neighbor and to invite you to receive the free gift of forgiveness, reconciliation, and eternal life through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.”

Talking about the Federal Vision Controversy on the Heidelcast (Part 2)

The second part of my conversation with Dr. R. Scott Clark on the Heidelcast is now up. Here's the blurb from the Heidelblog:

For those who are outside the Reformed churches, the so-called (and self-named) Federal Vision movement probably seems like a tempest in a teapot. For those of us, however, who worship in Reformed churches, the FV is no theoretical discussion. There have been actual Federal Visionists in pulpits preaching their errors. As a result. some believers have been robbed of their assurance through a corruption of the gospel and through the FV corruption of the doctrine of apostasy. Others have been led into a false view of baptism and the Lord’s Supper (e.g., paedocommunion). The FV errors have led to a series of ecclesiastical trials. Most believers, even those in Presbyterian and Reformed churches, have probably never seen an ecclesiastical trial. In these two episodes we’ve been able to get a behind-the-scenes view of one such FV-related trial. 

Here is part 1 of the interview with Pastor M. Jay Bennett with links to background materials. 

Here’s episode 54.

Talking about the Federal Vision Controversy on the Heidelcast (Part 1)

This week I had the privilege of discussing the Federal Vision controversy with Dr. R. Scott Clark on the Heidelcast. Here's the blurb from the Heidelblog:

The self-described and so-called Federal Vision movement has been troubling the confessional (NAPARC) Reformed and Presbyterian denominations since before it had a cool name. It presents itself as Reformed theology but is only Reformed in the way that Arminius was Reformed. He was a Reformed minister. He was never convicted of error yet his theology was soundly rejected by the Reformed Churches at the Synod of Dort. The FV has been rejected by most of the NAPARC denominations in assemblies and in study reports. Nevertheless, that rejection has not always translated into successful prosecutions on the ground, most notably in three cases in the PCA. In cases in the Pacific Northwest, Siouxlands, and in the Missouri Presbytery the prosecution of particular Federal Vision cases has failed. So, what happened? That’s a good question and the Rev. Mr. M. Jay Bennett, pastor of Neon Reformed Presbyterian Church (OPC) in Neon, KY joins us in this episode and the next to help us understand what happened in one high-profile case....

Here’s episode 53.

Is Church Membership Important? (Part 4)

In part three we looked at the necessity of visible church membership for the reception of the Word and the sacraments. We learned that an individual might receive the benefit of the Word preached for a time without joining the church. But he cannot receive it in that condition perpetually, because the Word itself teaches the necessity of church membership. Therefore if one is benefiting from the Word read and preached, he will join the church. One way we see this is with regard to the sacraments. The Bible teaches that participation in the sacraments requires visible church membership.

In part four we will examine what the Bible teaches about church discipline and membership.

In 1 Cor. 11:27-31 we see church discipline connected with the reception of the Lord's Supper. The Apostle explains that there are worthy and unworthy manners of receiving the sacrament. Worthy reception amounts to the maintenance of the credibility of one's profession of faith (i.e. discerning the body). Therefore there are times when the Supper should be withheld from a person if the credibility of his profession is in question. This would constitute an act of church discipline. And since receiving the sacraments is dependent on visible church membership, therefore in this respect so is church discipline.  

Further in 1 Peter 5:1-5 we read, "So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."

In this text the Apostle Peter exhorts his fellow elders (presbuterous) to be proper shepherds over the flock (i.e. "those in your charge"). They are undershepherds of the chief Shepherd. Christ rules his church through these men (Matt. 16:19; 18:17-18; John 20:21-23, cf. WCF 30.2). Further he commands individual believers to submit to the government of elders who have charge over them, saying "be subject to the elders."

This relationship between elders and congregants is only possible for those that have voluntarily associated with one another (i.e. believers) or are under the headship of one who has (i.e. their children). The elders could have no charge over anyone apart from this, since their rule under Christ is declarative and ministerial rather than legislative and magisterial. They declare God's word in service to his people. They DO NOT legislate their own words or force obedience.

And what is the goal of church government? 1 Pet. 5:6-11 concludes, "Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you. Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world. And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you. To him be the dominion forever and ever. Amen."

Through church discipline God protects his covenant people from evil so that they may continue to be nourished in the faith unto eternal life. Therefore visible church membership is of vital importance.

Conclusion

In Eph. 5:25-30 we read, "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body."

The Lord Jesus Christ loves the visible church. It is his bride. It is his body. How can a person claim to be united to Christ, and not also be united to his body? Just as a man nourishes and cherishes his own body, so Jesus nourishes and cherishes his church. He does this through the Word, the sacraments, and church discipline.

Much more could be said about the importance of visible church membership, but my prayer is that these short articles will help orient us to the fundamentals of the Bible's teaching, and that having been so oriented we might better love her and participate ever more faithfully in her worship and service.

Is Church Membership Important? (Part 3)

In part two we set out the historic Protestant view of the three marks of the visible church, namely the Word, the sacraments, and church discipline. We also saw that while each mark is essential to the being of the church, there is a functional hierarchy among them. The Word is primary. The sacraments are secondary. Church discipline is tertiary. These are ordinary means whereby God creates and confirms saving faith in the hearts of his elect unto eternal life. Visible church membership is vitally important because the church is the place of the means of grace.

But couldn't a person just attend the church's worship services and get the same benefits without actually becoming a member? Is official membership really necessary?

One could indeed receive the benefit of the Word preached for a time without becoming a member. I say for a time because if he was truly benefiting from the Word preached he would recognize his obligation to receive the sacraments and church discipline, neither of which can be received apart from membership. Let's begin with the sacraments. What does the Bible teach about the sacraments and church membership? 

Westminster Larger Catechism Q/A. 162 offers this fine definition of a sacrament: "A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ in his church, to signify, seal, and exhibit unto those that are within the covenant of grace, the benefits of his mediation; to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces; to oblige them to obedience; to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another; and to distinguish them from those that are without." 

Notice that it says a sacrament is an ordinance "instituted by Christ in his church" for the benefit of "those that are within the covenant of grace... to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces; to oblige them to obedience; to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another, and to distinguish them from those that are without." In other words, the sacraments are NOT given to individual believers, but to all those within the visible church.

The LORD gave the OT sacrament of circumcision not just to Abraham but to his children throughout their generations (Gen. 17:9-14). He gave the OT sacrament of Passover not just to Moses but to all Israel (Ex. 12). When Jesus instituted the NT sacrament of baptism, which replaces and perfects OT circumcision, he not only gave it to the disciples but to those who would become disciples in all nations (Matt. 28:19), because as Peter preaches to Israel, "the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the LORD our God calls to himself" (Acts 2:39). And when the Lord Jesus instituted the NT sacrament of the Lord's Supper in Matt. 26:26-28, he not only gave it to the disciples but he said of the cup, "this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." So the Apostle Paul will later write to the church in Corinth, "For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you" (1 Cor. 11:23a).   

Clearly the sacraments belong to the visible church for the benefit of all those that are within the covenant of grace. They do not belong to any individual. Therefore by definition one must join the membership of the visible church in order to enjoy the benefits of the sacraments. 

Jesus has instituted two sacraments in the NT church: (1) Baptism and (2) The Lord's Supper (WLC 164).

Baptism is a rite of solemn admission into the membership of the visible church (WLC 165). Therefore if one is to receive it he must become a member, which happens by being born to believing parents or by conversion.

With respect to the Lord's Supper, the issue is a little more complex. While one must undoubtedly be a member of the visible church to partake, the necessary proximity of that membership is debated. Some churches practice closed communion, meaning only those who are members of that local church can receive the Supper there. In the branch of the visible church in which I minister, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, one need not be a member of the local church in order to receive the Supper there. But one must be a communing member in good standing of some local church where the gospel is preached in order to receive it.       

Jesus has instituted the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper in his church. They belong to the visible church as a whole, not to any individual. One must be a member in order to receive the sacraments by which God so graciously nourishes and strengthens us in the faith. Therefore visible church membership is vitally important. 

In part four we will take a look at membership and church discipline.     

Is Church Membership Important? (Part 2)

In part one we defined the church as the assembly set apart by God to be his treasured possession (Deut. 7:6). We also learned that the Bible speaks of the church in two different senses. Sometimes it refers to the whole company of the elect. This is what we call the invisible church. Other times it refers to those throughout the world who profess the true religion and their children. This is what we call the visible church. Not all members of the visible church are members of the invisible church, and not necessarily every member of the invisible church becomes a member of the visible church prior to his death. But while deathbed conversions may be possible, they are clearly extraordinary in God’s work of salvation. The visible church “is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation” (WCF 25.2, emphasis added).

So what precisely is the visible church and why is it so important?

The historic Protestant tradition defines the visible church according to three marks:

1. The Word rightly administered. 
2. The sacraments rightly administered. 
3. Church discipline rightly administered. 

These three marks are comprehended in the Westminsterian term “the true religion” (WCF 25.2). They are defining characteristics of the church. All three are equally important, but there is a functional hierarchy among them. The Word is primary. The sacraments are secondary. Church discipline is tertiary. We see this hierarchy in both the historia salutis (i.e. the “history of salvation” or salvation accomplished) and the ordo salutis (i.e. the “order of salvation” or salvation applied).

In the historia salutis God has given his people sacraments as signs and seals of his covenant (i.e. his Word). Moreover, the actions God institutes as sacraments are prescribed as such in that same covenant. The sacraments are meaningless apart from what they signify and seal, namely the covenant promises, and they have no being apart from their institution. This is why their significance should be taught and words of institution should be read during their administration.

In the ordo salutis the covenant promises are applied to us by faith alone, and "faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Rom. 10:17). Saving faith comes through the Word. It does not come through the sacraments (cf. Rom. 4:10-11). The sacraments are the means God uses to confirm the faith already created by the Word. [This doesn't mean the covenant sign can only be applied to believers. After all, Isaac was circumcised before faith. It means that the covenant sign only fulfills its function as a seal when it is joined to faith.]

With respect to church discipline, we see the same. Discipline is only rendered according to the Word, and it presupposes the prior covenant promises signified and sealed through the sacraments and received by faith alone.

Therefore looking at the three marks of the church through the lens of the historia salutis and the ordo salutis, we see a clear hierarchy among them. The Word is primary. The sacraments are secondary. Church discipline is tertiary. All three are necessary in their proper order.

The  visible church is the place of the means of grace whereby the triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—creates and confirms saving faith in the hearts of sinners unto eternal life. First, saving faith is created and confirmed by the administration of the Word. Second, it is further confirmed by the administration of the sacraments. Third, it is further confirmed by church discipline. Therefore church membership is of vital importance.

But can’t a person just attend the visible church and receive these benefits without becoming a member? In part three we will take a closer look at the first and second marks of the church, getting to the very heart of membership.

Is Church Membership Important? (Part 1)

It is a joyful time at Neon Reformed Presbyterian Church. We are about to receive four communing members and three noncommuning members into the fold. Praise God from whom all blessings flow!

Lately I’ve been thinking about church membership. Why is it important? Does Jesus want us to be members of his church? Would it be sinful to refuse membership in a local church? In considering these and other questions we first need to define the church.

“Church” is the English translation of the Greek word ekklesia, which means “assembly.” The church is the assembly set apart by God to be his treasured possession (Deut. 7:6). The Bible speaks of the church in two different senses. Sometimes “church” refers to the whole company of the elect. We call this the invisible church (WCF 25.1). Other times it refers to those who are assembling together in various locations under the same doctrinal confession. We call this the visible church (WCF 25.2). This distinction is clearly taught in Romans 9:6b, “For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel.” In other words, not all members of the visible church (i.e. all those throughout the world who profess the true religion and their children) are members of the invisible church (i.e. the elect).

But what about the reverse? Must all members of the invisible church also be members of the visible church? Do the elect always enter into visible church membership before death? 

In response to this question many appeal to the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43). Assuming the thief was converted from pagan idolatry just moments before his death, he would have been a member of the invisible church but never a member of the visible church. But the text does not tell us whether this man is a new convert from paganism or not. Here’s what we know from the text:

• He was a thief enduring the death sentence (v. 39).
• He feared God (v. 40).
• He understood his punishment at the hands of men was just (v. 41a).
• He understood Jesus’ punishment at the hands of men was unjust (v. 41b).
• He saw the kingdom of God by faith in Christ (i.e. he believed the gospel) (v. 42).
• He was elect (v. 43).  

We do not know the timing of his conversion or his involvement in the visible church up to this point. It is possible that he was a circumcised Hebrew, born to believing parents into the visible church. It is also possible he had already professed faith in Christ as a member of the visible church prior to his crucifixion. Is it really unthinkable that a true believer could commit such a crime? So while it is possible the thief is the only biblical example of a deathbed conversion, we cannot say that with certainty.

Nonetheless, we must at least acknowledge the theoretical possibility of such. God can save a man who is outside the visible church on his deathbed. This is beyond dispute. But even in acknowledging such a possibility we confess that the visible church “is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation” (WCF 25.2, emphasis added). In other words, the ordinary experience of those whom God has chosen to save (i.e. the invisible church of the elect) includes membership in the visible church (i.e. being assembled with others who profess the true religion). To believe with one’s heart ordinarily includes confessing with one’s mouth and joining one’s voice with others of like confession (Rom. 10:10).

In part two we will define the visible church more precisely and begin to look at why membership in it is of such vital importance.