On Sunday our elders proposed a new church mission statement. At its core is the commitment is to be a “Family of Believers Centered on the Gospel.” In preparation for that “roll out,” I preached a sermon on Galatians 1 and the importance of protecting and proclaiming the gospel.

Here’s the sermon audio, with a few additional resources and response questions.

The Gospel Proper

Theological Triage: A Way to Keep the Gospel at the Center

Response Questions

What is the letter to the Galatians all about? Why does the tone matter? How does it teach us to think about the Gospel?
Who is Paul writing to? And why does that matter? (Hint: the church is ultimately responsible for their doctrinal beliefs).
What is the gospel? Read Galatians 1:4; Romans 1:1–7; 1 Corinthians 15:1–8 for reference.
How can we deviate from the Gospel? How have you turned aside—in belief or practice? How have you seen churches deviate? What do we learn from Peter’s example (read Galatians 2:11–14)?
How does a church keep the gospel at the center? What role does a statement of faith play in that? What about a mission statement?
Read over the mission statement and the associated Scriptures. What would you add or edit in this statement? Talk about how keeping these truths before us helps us keep the gospel at the center.
Pray for the church and for our focus on the gospel.

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

The Lord’s Reign: Herman Bavinck on the Scriptural Sense of God’s Transcendence

January 22, 2019January 22, 2019 / davidsschrock

The Lord has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all.
— Psalm 103:19 —

For thus says the One who is high and lifted up, who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: “I dwell in the high and holy place, and also with him who is of a contrite and lowly spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of the contrite.
— Isaiah 57:15 —

Where is God?

In one sense, God is everywhere (Ps. 139:7–12). In another, God is outside of space and time (1 Kings 8:27). Still, in a third way, Scripture speaks of God as dwelling in heaven, high above his creation (Isa 57:15; cf. Ps. 135:6). Yet, it is important to remember God’s place in heaven is not outside of creation. Rather, it is the created place for the glorious and uncreated God to dwell within creation.

From that divine throne, God rules all creation. And in creation, God reveals himself to us in his world and in his word. Bringing these big and beautiful realities together, Herman Bavinck describes what it means for God to be over and in creation. Doctrinally, these realities are expressed by the terms transcendence and immanence. And in the newly released volume Philosophy of Revelation, Bavinck has this to say about a scriptural sense of God’s transcendence: Continue reading →

Via Emmaus Podcast: Two New Episodes (Genesis & Matthew)

January 21, 2019January 21, 2019 / davidsschrock

podcastlogo

We are still working out the bugs on our new podcast, but here are two new podcasts that discuss passages of Scripture in Genesis and Matthew. This podcast was begun to help our church and anyone else read the Bible better.

If you have any questions for this podcast, feel free to ask here.

NEW EPISODES

EPISODE 03OT: Genesis 8–14 | January 21, 2019 | Anton Brooks & David Schrock

In this episode we discuss the curse of Ham, the tower of Babel, Abraham’s tithe to Abraham, and more from the book of Genesis. For more on Genesis, see

EPISODE 03NT: Matthew 8–13 | January 21, 2019 | Anton Brooks & David Schrock

In this episode we discuss Jesus’s acts of healing, the meaning of an apostle, point of parables, and more from the book of Matthew. For more on Matthew, see

Continue reading →

A Biblical View of the Body

January 18, 2019January 18, 2019 / davidsschrock

So glorify God in your body.
— 1 Corinthians 6:20 —

Last night our church discussed the book Love Thy Body: Answering Hard Questions about Life and Sexuality by Nancy Pearcey. I cannot stress how important this book is.

In a room of 30 church-going men and women, few could remember a time when a pastor or church had taught a series on the body. Most instead reflected on the way churches have focused on the soul/spirit to the neglect of the body. Though Scripture has much to say about creation and God’s view of the body, many in the church have been fed a diet of Gnostic wisdom.

Gnosticism is the ancient philosophy that denigrated the material world and the body. It valued the spirit, the mind, the soul; it rejected the material as impure and unholy. Probably more by accident than intention, evangelicals have followed this way of thinking. We have not done a good job teaching a positive view of the body, and we must look to Pope John Paul II to find a robust theology of the body.

In a hyper-confused world that denies the significance of the body, Christians need to give attention to the body. This is why Love Thy Body is so needed, as it tackles all sorts of subjects related to the body. It gives a grid (Francis Schaeffer’s Upper Story and Lower Story House) for understanding why so many hate the body. And it helps Christians to embrace a unified worldview that appreciates the material and immaterial part of mankind. For all these reasons, I would recommend Pearcey’s book.

I would also encouraged believers to arm themselves with Scripture that speaks about the body. To that end, I share this four-fold list. Following the pattern of creation-fall-redemption-resurrection, it gives a number of key texts for appreciating what Scripture says about the body.

Take time to read these verses and what they mean for your body. I am not including any commentary on the verses, but let me encourage you to think about how they give us a realistic and comprehensive view of the body. Continue reading →

The Four Seeds of Abraham: Natural, National, Christ, and “In Christ”

January 15, 2019January 15, 2019 / davidsschrock / 2 Comments

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring.
It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one,
“And to your offspring,” who is Christ.
— Galatians 3:16 —

Who is Abraham’s offspring? Or is it, Who are Abraham’s offspring? Is it one or many? Or both?

In the Bible one of the most important realities to grasp is how the Bible presents itself. In other words, because Scripture is the inspired interpretation of God’s actions in the world—even as God’s Word is itself a divine action—it is vital to see how God’s earlier revelation prepares the way for his later purposes.

Sometimes this is called an “eschatological” reading of Scripture. That may sound complicated, but it’s not. Eschatology means “the study of last things” (eschatos = last), and most of the time people immediately jump to what they perceive are the “last things” in the Bible. However, if we consider that God stands outside of time and created all things for the purpose putting them under his Son’s feet (see Ephesians 1:10), then we must read the Bible as one unified-but-unfolding plan of redemption.

In this way, eschatology doesn’t begin in Revelation, or Daniel, or Zechariah, it begins in Genesis. And from Genesis to Revelation, God is working all things for the purposes of his people—the offspring of Abraham.

But who is/are Abraham’s offspring? Continue reading →

Let Scripture Interpret Scripture

January 10, 2019 / davidsschrock

bible In our recent podcast on Genesis and Matthew, we considered how various aspects of the ancient Near East inform our understanding of Genesis. Indeed, there are many reasons to compare the Old Testament to the ancient Near East (and the New Testament to Second Temple Judaism). In both testaments, the historical background give us insight into the Scriptures.

That said, there is more insight that comes from comparing Scripture to Scripture, by reading the Old Testament with the light of the new, by reading the New Testament with the background of the Old Testament, and reading both testaments as mutually-interpreting books of God’s inspired word.

In fact, on that very point New Testament scholar Grant Macaskill makes this wise observation:

New Testament scholars are usually very good at examining the context and backgrounds provided by Graeco-Roman and Jewish literature, but we are generally less successful at examining that provided by other New Testament writings and bringing these to bear on our exegesis. There is a vast amount of literature that reads Paul in the light of Qumran; there is rather less that reads Paul in the light of Peter.

The objection, of course, is that we run the risk of conflating the distinctive theology of each and doing so without sensitivity to the timelines on which they are located. But these texts are the products of a movement with a certain cohesion, generated within a compact period of time. It is, then, necessary to the historical task for us to consider how they may relate to one another and to reflect upon the ways in which even their diversity may emerge from a basic unity of thought. (Grant Macaskill, Union with Christ in the New Testament, 2)

I am not a New Testament scholar, but I believe his point applies to us all. The best interpreter of Scripture is Scripture, and so we should give equal—even greater!—attention to the rest of the Bible when interpreting Scripture. Sure, let’s read extra-biblical texts that inform Scripture, but even more lets immerse ourselves in the Bible, so that our interpretations are saturated with the Bible and not just the latest academic fad or archaeological discovery.

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

Knowing and Being Known: A Word Best Understood in Covenantal Context

January 9, 2019January 9, 2019 / davidsschrock / 2 Comments

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. ²²On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ ²³And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
— Matthew 7:21–23 —

I suspect that Jesus words in Matthew 7:21–23 might raise some questions if one does not have a basic understanding of God’s knowledge. What does it mean that Jesus never knew you? Certainly, God knows all things, and because Jesus is God the Son, he must know all things. So what do his words mean?

The answer comes from knowing the way knowledge is spoken of in the Bible. Going back to Genesis 4, we find knowledge often describes covenantal relations—either between two people (as in marriage) or between God and man. Either way, knowledge is a relational term and one that consistently carries the idea of covenant-making and covenant-keeping.

In what follows, I share a handful of examples and come back to Matthew 7. Continue reading →

First Creation and Second Creation: Adam, Noah, and the Focus of Genesis 1–11

January 7, 2019January 8, 2019 / davidsschrock / 2 Comments

When we read Genesis 1–11, one important observation to make is the way Moses related Noah to Adam, and the covenant with Noah (i.e., his “second creation”) to God’s first creation. Helping us see the intentions of Moses, Peter Gentry outlines seven ways Genesis 8–9 recapitulate Genesis 1–2. Noticing these literary markers helps us read the Bible and understand the message of Genesis 1–11.

Here is his outline, which borrows from Bruce Waltke and Ken Mathews (Kingdom through Covenant, 162–63: Continue reading →

‘Sin Crouching at the Door’ or ‘A Sin Offering at the Gate’: Michael Morales on Genesis 4:7

January 4, 2019January 4, 2019 / davidsschrock / 1 Comment

morales

If you do well, will you not be accepted?
And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door.
Its desire is contrary to you, but you must rule over it.”
— Genesis 4:7 —

In one of the best books I read last year—a biblical theology of Leviticus—Michael Morales (Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?) offers an alternative reading to Genesis 4:7. Actually, he recalls a traditional reading found in commentators like Adam Clarke (1762–1832), Adoniram Judson (1788–1850), Young’s Literal Translation (1862), Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown (1877), and Matthew Henry (1662–1714) (p. 57n51).

Commenting on the way sin crouches at the door, he argues that the language could also be render “sin offering,” and that there is good reason for seeing the door, or gate, is the place where the sons of Adam brought their sin offerings—or, should have brought their sin offerings.

I appreciate this interpretation as it pays careful attention to the cultic themes of Genesis (i.e., temple, sacrifice, priesthood) and the way it explains in more objective terms why Cain’s offering is rejected and Abel’s is accepted. The reason? The former rejected God’s Word and Gods’ way; he brought a sacrifice of his own choosing, rather than the sin offering which God prescribed. Meanwhile, Abel brought a offering which responded to God’s Word in faith and sought atonement for his sin.

Read in the context of Moses’s five books, this seems like a superior interpretation, as Morales explains further. Continue reading →

Of Spaceships and City Streets: G.K. Beale on Two Kinds of “Literal” Reading

January 1, 2019 / davidsschrock

In his massive and massively helpful A New Testament Biblical Theology, G. K. Beale spends the opening chapters outlining the storyline of the Bible and the eschatological nature of the Old Testament. Rather than defining eschatology as merely that category of doctrine that describes future events, he rightly explains how the original creation came with “eschatological potential” (89). Still, what is most helpful in his approach to reading the Bible eschatologically is his approach to reading the Bible “literally.”

Much debate continues on this point today, and to quote the “theologian” Mandy Patinkin (of Princess Bride fame), I do not believe most people who demand a literal reading know what that word means. Or at least, their definition and use only consider one aspect of a literal reading—namely, a narrow reading of individual texts, without considering how a literal reading can also be applied to whole books, including the whole canon itself. Continue reading →