Complicating Manhood and Womanhood (Gabriel Williams)

For the majority of my Christian life, I was built up in the faith and nourished within conservative Pentecostal and Wesleyan-influenced churches. Within those circles, there were a number of topics that were constantly discussed, almost to the point of obsession (such as spiritual warfare, end time signs, dreams/visions, modesty, etc.). As I began to embrace Reformed theology and began to have more contact with the wider evangelical world, I noticed immediately that those aforementioned topics were hardly ever brought up.

Nowadays, the topic of discussion has invariably focused on biblical manhood and womanhood. When my wife goes on social media, she informs me of the proliferation of “mom blogs”, which seem to spend almost all of their time focusing on the “pink passages”. Along with these blogs are a large collection of books on “gospel-centered motherhood” or “serving God as a single woman”. At times, it has given the impression that Christian women can only really openly discuss the safe topics of biblical womanhood, such as childrearing, submission, or serving God in the home.

From the male perspective, I’ve been introduced to a number of books on biblical manhood in which a Christian father is called to be a prophet, priest, and a king in his home. At various times, this has given me the impression that godliness for a Christian man is very different than godliness for a Christian woman. It has also given the impression that men need to fulfill these roles because women, in general, are delicate, frail, weak-minded, and are prone to deception. After hearing all of these discussions (which can be inconsistent or contradictory to each other), my wife and I asked ourselves the question: Is biblical womanhood and manhood meant to be this difficult? Are we making this a more complex topic than is biblically warranted?

The Marks of Godliness

First, it should be stated that many of the marks of godliness that are geared towards women are also geared towards men elsewhere in Scripture. For example, women are encouraged to adorn themselves with a gentle and humble spirit (cf. 1 Peter 3:3-6), but aren’t these qualities simply the fruit of the Spirit for all believers (cf. Galatians 5:22-23)? Furthermore, Christian women are called to be reverent in behavior, sensible, and pure (cf. Titus 2:3-5). However, the same instruction is given to men within the same passage (cf. Titus 2:2,6-8). On the male side, men are encouraged to be sound in faith and in doctrine, yet Paul says throughout the epistles that believers (men and women) should encourage one another, admonish one another, and teach one another (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:14, Colossians 3:16). In other words, the mark of biblical manhood and womanhood is simply this: godliness.

Biblical Roles and Culture

Second, I wonder how much of biblical manhood/womanhood is mixed with traditional American values. For example, many of the popular works on biblical womanhood place the identity of Christian women primarily (or solely) in the home. This is perhaps the strangest idea that has been attached to biblical womanhood because it is largely inconsistent with the history of women in the church and very culturally specific. It has also led to a number of speculative questions regarding biblical womanhood in the workplace (such as should a woman hold a position of civic authority). Within the New Testament church, there are numerous examples of women (such as Lydia, Dorcas, and Anna) who are described as doing significantly more than homemaking. I believe that Rachel Miller has said it best:

“But just as men are more than their careers, women are more than their familial     responsibilities. We are believers and fellow heirs. We may well be called to serve God in         additional ways. Taking care of our families can include discipling others as part of the family of God.”

In this sense, I think there’s an inconsistency on how women and men are treated in this area. Christian men are routinely warned of the danger of finding their identity in their careers, and are exhorted to treat their other callings in life (such as their role as husbands, fathers, and church members) as worthy of their attention. However, the overemphasis of the familial responsibilities for women has given the impression that women are defined primarily based on what on what they do. In other words, Christian men are admonished not to be workaholics in their careers (outside the home), but Christian women are generally encouraged to devote their energy and talents solely in the home. This raises some honest questions: Are women useful outside the home? Are women useful after the season of childrearing is over? Are women actually needed in the functioning and edification of the church (beyond nursery and potluck meals)?

Moreover, historical research has shown that women largely worked outside the home throughout Western history. The reality is that many Christian women work outside of the home not because of the appeal of feminism, but because it is necessary. For the male side, the duties associated with biblical manhood seem to have many similarities with stereotypical American chauvinism where men are characterized as quiet, aloof, and dominant. This may explain why there are few sermons at conferences geared for Christian men on developing gentleness and meekness or addressing gossip among men.

The Need for Older Saints

From my background, the question of biblical manhood and womanhood was rarely discussed because we were raised with “church mothers” and “church fathers”. These older saints knew their role within the church, and they functioned as the gatekeepers of the local church (under the authority of the pastor). They were the individuals who modeled the standard for godliness. Whereas the pastor’s role was primarily teaching and preaching, it was the “church fathers” who gave young men like me clear guidance regarding godly maturity. These men taught me how to be temperate, dignified, and sensible. My wife, like many young Christian women, learned how to be godly through the example of “church mothers”. These older women modeled Christian conduct by exuding self-control (particular with their speech) and through their encouragement and exhortations. They also taught young women how to be teachable, how to be useful within the local church, how to be humble without being passive, and how to be confident without being prideful. For us, biblical womanhood and manhood wasn’t a topic of endless speculation, but it was a modeling of Christian character as demonstrated by older godly saints. It has been my impression that older men and women within broader evangelical churches do not necessarily view themselves in the same light.

Let’s not complicate a matter that is taught in a straightforward manner in Scripture. It is sinful to blur the distinctions that God has made between men and women as if gender/sex is fluid. However, it is also sinful to bind the consciences of men and women based upon extrabiblical hedges and cultural preferences. The pursuit of biblical manhood and womanhood is a pursuit for godliness.

Luther’s Lion-Hearted Historians (Aaron Denlinger)

Luther expressed his appreciation for history and historians on numerous occasions. History, he believed, provides fodder for both fear and praise since God is sovereign over the course of human events. History records and reminds us how God “upholds, rules, obstructs, prospers, punishes, and honors the world, and especially men, each according to his just desert, evil or good.” History serves ethics by providing numerous examples of conduct to be emulated or avoided, and by providing a sense of national identity that is critical to the maintenance of public mores. Historians, therefore, “are the most useful people and the best teachers, so that one can never honor, praise, and thank them enough.”

Luther also had thoughts on how history should be done (i.e. historiography). He shared those thoughts in 1538 in the preface to a German translation of Galeatius Capella’s history of the reign of the Milanese Duke Francesco II Sforza. Given the attention Luther is receiving this year as an object of historical interest, it’s intriguing to note how Luther himself believed historians should proceed with their task. Hearing Luther ruminate on the practice of history gives some insight into how he himself might have wished his own story told.

The historian, Luther opines, must be “a first-rate man who has a lion’s heart, unafraid to write the truth.” The reformer found few historians living up to this standard. “The greater number write in such a way that they readily pass over or put the best construction on the vices and deficiencies of their own times in the interest of their lords or friends and in turn glorify all too highly some trifling or vain virtue. On the other hand, they embellish or besmirch histories to the advantage of their father land and disadvantage of the foreigners, according to whether they love or hate someone.”

Luther, it seems to me, understood well that history is a loaded enterprise because it traffics identities. The historian is never merely retelling things that have happened. Both in the selection of events depicted and in the manner of their depiction, the historian is constructing his subject’s identity, and ultimately either vindicating or vilifying his subject. “Love or hate” for one’s subject, as Luther puts it, heavily informs the identity ultimately constructed.

Luther’s judgment that most historians lack lions’ hearts and shy away from the truth may seem more pertinent to his day than ours. Early modern historians were generally more upfront than their present-day counterparts in acknowledging their “love or hate” for their subject(s), and in vindicating or vilifying accordingly. But I’m not personally convinced that all that much has changed between Luther’s day and our own. Few historians in our day, it seems to me, really value truth above all else as they engage in the historical task. Few, for that matter, likely believe in “truth” as something distinct from their own or anyone else’s interpretation of the facts at all, at least if pressed on the matter. The modern academy apes the Christian virtue of “truth” with its insistence on methodological objectivity, and promises/threatens those who pursue/reject that virtue the heaven/hell of tenure/termination. But the academy’s watered down virtues and eschatological promises/threats aren’t ultimately capable of producing Luther’s longed-for lion-hearted historians. At best it will produce historians who are better at hiding their “love or hate,” much as I surpass my own children’s skill at masking the inherent self-centeredness that mutually characterizes them and me.

Perhaps, in the final analysis, the Gospel holds greater resources than the modern academy for producing truth-tellers (Eph. 4:24-25), and thus Luther’s lion-hearted historians. Just as the Gospel frees us to be honest about ourselves before God and others, rejecting efforts to vindicate ourselves, it ultimately frees to be honest about others and eschew efforts to justify or incriminate them — the fate of our historical subjects, after all, pivots on the presence of God’s grace towards them, not on our moral judgments, however subtly communicated, regarding them. Christians of all people should have less invested in their own or anyone else’s identity than they do the truth, and more incentive to bear true witness about their neighbor, whether dead or alive, than others might have.

Regardless, two question persist: Would Luther have wished the same moral standards, for which he advocated, of historical writing in general applied to the historians and histories of his own life and doings? And (perhaps more pressing in our own historical moment) who among the historians narrating Luther this year will prove lion-hearted, and who will prove that some agenda — love, hate, or otherwise — ranks higher in their priorities than the truth?

On Friday your support of the Alliance can go even further! (Robert Brady)

2017SeendHeard.jpg
On Friday, November 17th the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals is participating in a special day of extraordinary giving. Visit ExtraGive.org, make a donation to the Alliance, and for every dollar you donate Alliance donors are matching up to $25,000, dollar per dollar. In addition, the Lancaster Foundation and their presenting sponsors will stretch your gift even further with their $500,000 stretch pool.

The world needs a strong voice of sound doctrine. Through your gift to the Alliance you will share the Gospel, proclaim biblical doctrine, engage the culture, and equip the church via this web site, as well as through our broadcasts and events.

Since first joining the Extraordinary Give in 2014, donors like you have yielded tremendous growth. In 2016 an extraordinary $41,860 was raised! This year your participation can more than double your impact. 

Hollywood and the Human Heart (Nick Batzig)

As more women bring to light the heinous sexual misconduct of male celebrities and politicians, it would do us well to remember two all-important truths: First, God’s word testifies to the pervasive depravity of all men and women (Rom. 3:1-10); and, second, Scripture holds out the universal remedy for sinful men and women–namely, Christ and him crucified. To make this observation is in no way whatsoever to downplay the urgent need we have to protect women from sexual predators and to put punitive measures in place to prevent sexual harassment and abuse of all shapes and forms. It is, however, to highlight that there are dangers associated with the media’s fixation on only one or two forms of sexual sin, while neglecting the biblical testimony about the pervasive spiritual depravity of men and women. When depravity is denied, the Gospel is inevitably neglected or rejected. When the Gospel is neglected or rejected, there can be no prospect of forgiveness, cleansing, restoration and renewal–the hope of which Scripture constantly holds forth while bringing indictments against the sin of mankind.  

We ought to welcome an exposure of sexual sin in a culture that has celebrated, embraced and fought for every other conceivable form of sexual sin. However, only highlighting one or two specific forms of sexual depravity will have the inevitable and undesired result of fueling self-righteousness among those outraged by it. When the media singles out one particular sexual sin, while approving almost all other forms, one who hasn’t fallen into a socially unacceptable form of sexual sin begins to go on a self-righteous rampage about the sin of others while refusing to acknowledge his or her own depravity. 

There is no outrage in the media about the absolutely hellish nature of pornography and the destructive nature it has on marriages, young people and on society as a whole. As our culture rejects the clear teaching of Scripture, and increasingly promotes and defends polyamorous, incestuous and every conceivable form of androgynous and homoerotic act, we are sliding into a veritable pit of sexual depravity. The media would have us believe that the great problem in Hollywood and Capitol Hill is the problem of power structures that allow men to abuse that power in order to gratify sexual desire. The news outlets may shine an occasional spotlight on the female teacher who engaged in inappropriate sexual relations with an underage student; but, it men in positions of power that are the chief perpetrators. Nevertheless, it is not power structures that lead male politicians and celebrities or female teachers into sexually depraved acts. If we only focus on nurture, to the neglect of nature, we will ultimately bring about nothing lasting. 

The Scriptures are clear that the problem in Hollywood and Capitol Hill is the problem of the human heart. We are all fallen in Adam (Romans 5:12-21). The guilt and corruption of Adam’s sin was imputed to all of his descendants. There is no other explanation for why Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Anthony Weiner, Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey, Roy Moore and Al Franken have done the repulsive things they have done. There is no other explanation for why you and I have done all of the sinful things that we have done. 

When the Apostle Paul set forth the Bible’s exposure of our depravity, he explained: “the Scripture imprisoned everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe” (Gal. 3:22). The Scripture exposes sin and confines all men and women under sin’s dominion and condemnation so that those who will believe on Christ will come to him for forgiveness and redemption. If all we do is agree with the secular world about the heinousness of one or two forms of sexual sin, and throw our support to the call for accountability and repercussions, we are simply wielding God’s Law. However, when we acknowledge the testimony of Scripture about our own pervasive depravity and our need for Christ, we will be all the more ready to extend the hope of forgiveness and cleansing in Christ to those whose depravity has been publicly exposed. This is an opportunity for the church to speak to the culture at a time when the culture is still acknowledging certain forms of sin and depravity. The window may be small, and the moment is passing by quickly; but, if we have eyes to see and hearts that are burdened for the lost, we will seek to seize the moment for the redemption of both men and women around us.  

Revitalizing an Eighteenth-Century Christian Community: Baptists Seeking Revival (Michael Haykin )

Theological Reformation

Eighteenth-century Baptists did not emerge from their spiritual “winter” until the last two or three decades of the century. Again, there were a variety of reasons for what amounts to a profound revival among their ranks. There was theological reformation, in which the Hyper-Calvinism of the past was largely rejected in favour of a truly evangelical Calvinism. The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation, written by Andrew Fuller (1754-1815)1 and published in 1785, was the book that crystallized this movement of theological renewal. Fuller was a farmer by occupation, a big, broad-shouldered man who looked, to some at least, the very image of a village blacksmith. Yet, in the words of the British Baptist historian A. C. Underwood, Fuller was “the soundest and most creatively useful theologian” the Baptists had in the eighteenth century.2 It was during his first pastorate in the village of Soham, Cambridgeshire, from 1775 to 1782 that he wrote the substance of the above-mentioned book. In it he convincingly demonstrated on the basis of the Scriptures that it is the duty of all who hear the gospel to put their faith in Christ and the corresponding duty of pastors to preach the gospel clearly and plainly to all, using “free and solemn addresses, invitations, calls, and warnings … to bring them to Christ.”3

 

Calling for Repentance

Then calls for repentance played a critical role in the revitalization of many of these Baptist causes. For instance, Andrew Fuller, in his Causes of Declension in Religion, and Means of Revival (1785), outlined the spiritual apathy then reigning among far too many Baptists of his day:

“It is to be feared the old puritanical way of devoting ourselves wholly to be the Lord’s, resigning up our bodies, souls, gifts, time, property, with all we have and are to serve him, and frequently renewing these covenants before him, is now awfully neglected. This was to make a business of religion, a life’s work, and not merely an accidental affair, occurring but now and then, and what must be attended to only when we can spare time from other arrangements. Few seem to aim, pray, and strive after eminent love to God and one other. Many appear to be contented if they can but remember the time when they had such love in exercise, and then, tacking to it the notion of perseverance without the thing, they go on and on, satisfied, it seems, if they do but make shift just to get to heaven at last, without much caring how. If we were in a proper spirit, the question with us would not so much be What must I do for God? as, What can I do for God? A servant that heartily loves his master counts it a privilege to be employed by him, yea, an honour to be entrusted with any of his concerns.”4

Many, Fuller noted, were merely content to get to “heaven without concerning themselves overly about how they get there.” The practice of giving oneself wholly to God that had been common among the seventeenth-century Puritans had generally ceased to be part of late eighteenth-century Baptist piety. This apathy was well revealed in the question, “What I must do for God?” In other words, they were asking, “What is the minimum I must do to get to heaven?”

 

Five Ways Forward to Revival

Seeking to change this dire situation, Fuller suggested:

“If it is required “What then is to be done? Wherein in particular can we glorify God more than we have done?”, we answer by asking: Is there no room for amendment? Have we been sufficiently earnest and constant in private prayer? Are there none of us that have opportunities to set apart particular times to pray for the effusion of the Holy Spirit? Can we do more than we have done in instructing our families? Are there none of our dependents, workmen, or neighbours that we might speak to, at least so far as to ask them to go and hear the gospel? Can we rectify nothing in our tempers and behaviour in the world so as better to recommend religion? Cannot we watch more? Cannot we save a little more of our substance to give to the poor? In a word, is there no room or possibility left for our being more meek, loving, and resembling the blessed Jesus than we have been?”5 

Here, Fuller listed five ways in which his fellow Baptists could prepare themselves for renewal. At the top of the list is (1) prayer; (2) then the cultivation of Christianity in the home; (3) witnessing to unbelievers; (4) honest examination of what needs to be changed in one’s character and purposefully seeking to change it; (5) and finally, the development of a spirit of generosity to those in need.

However, Fuller went on to stress, one’s heart attitude was also important. “Think it not sufficient that we lament and mourn over our departures from God. We must return to him with full purpose of heart.” As Fuller reflected on this matter of heart-renewal, he urged his readers to “cherish a greater love to the truths of God; pay an invariable regard to the discipline of his house; cultivate love to one another, frequently mingle souls by frequently assembling yourselves together; encourage a meek, humble, and savoury spirit.”6

 

To Be Continued…

1. For the life and ministry of Fuller, see Paul Brewster, Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2010) and Peter J. Morden, The Life and Thought of Andrew Fuller (1754-1815) (Milton Keynes, England: Paternoster, 2015).

2. A History of the English Baptists (London: Carey Kingsgate Press Ltd., 1956), 166.

3. Cited Underwood, History of the English Baptists, 163-164. This quote is taken from the confession of faith that Fuller made when inducted into his second pastorate at Kettering, Northamptonshire, in 1783.

4. Andrew Fuller, Causes of Declension in Religion, and Means of Revival in The Complete Works of the Rev. Andrew Fuller, ed. Joseph Belcher (Repr. Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1988), III, 320.

5. Fuller, Causes of Declension in Religion, and Means of Revival in Complete Works, III, 320.

6. Fuller, Causes of Declension in Religion, and Means of Revival in Complete Works, III, 324.

*You can find the first two posts in this series here and here.

Conflict, Comfort and the Cross (Adam Parker)

Last week, a gunman entered First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas and killed 26 people, wounding 20 others. The massacre was brutal and left what will surely be scars on all of those who survived, many of whom were young children. Usually there is some sort of grieving period that decorum allows in the aftermath of such events, but as civilization abandons any pretense at care or compassion that grieving period is quickly disappearing.

One of the nastiest things about the internet is that it allows angry and grieving people to abstract the people they are writing about from reality. People are able to speak freely even when they know what they have to say is cruel or even evil. It should be no secret in the Christian community that the world thinks that we’re foolish. We acknowledge it, but sometimes we see it in ugly ways.

Perhaps the most despicable reactions came from Actor Michael McKean, who mocked the dead on Twitter and attacked those who encouraged prayer for the people in the church: “They had the prayers shot right out of them. Maybe try something else.” Wil Wheaton attacked one politician who expressed sympathy and prayers for those who had lost so much: “If prayers did anything, they’d still be alive.”

I do not wish to judge these men as human beings. I don’t know them in their everyday lives. I don’t know what they’ve been through or what they’ve seen, but someone who understands the cross would never say these sorts of things. These are the responses of people who do not understand the cross.

The mockery of the unbelieving world assumes a few significant things. It assumes that God would never permit his people to die. It assumes that suffering isn’t part of God’s plan. It assumes that if prayer “worked” then God’s people would just keep on living. And most fundamentally it assumes that God builds his church on power and strength. There’s an entire worldview of assumptions that have to be true if their mockery could have any basis, but of course all of these assumptions miss the cross.

The cross was the ultimate and willing display of weakness. When many think of the cross they think, perhaps of an identifying marker, a beautiful piece of jewelry, or some elaborate symbol. But the cross was horrible, ugly, and nonsensical. It was a weapon of death, akin to the rack or the guillotine. At the core of the Christian religion is the conviction that death is the road to life and weakness is the road to strength. That’s totally upside down from the rest of the world.

Paul says that “the world did not know God through wisdom” (1 Cor. 1:21). What he means is that if you were trying to dream up a way to rescue people from hell, the conclusion that reason would take you to is a show of power, a demonstration of strength. This is why the religious leaders mocked Jesus as he died: “Let him come down from the cross, and [then] we will believe in him.” And in a sense that mockery is echoed in the sentiments of men like Wheaton and McKean. The cross is foolish to these men (1 Cor. 1:18-25). What else would we expect?

You see, the mockers also don’t understand that Christians are called by Christ himself to carry the cross, too. If McKean, Wheaton, and their tribe don’t understand the cross, then they certainly won’t get what Christians are called to carry. What the saints at First Baptist Church were called to carry last week. Jesus spent a huge quantity of his earthly ministry preparing his disciples to suffer and carry the cross.

I do fear, however, that as Christians, we also forget these truths. How often do we prize earthly power, success, cultural authority, and the respect of those outside of the church? Prizing these things is a sign that we’ve learned to think like the world, too.

Sometimes I fear that as Christians we are far too easily embarrassed by the opinions of the watching world. The base ideas about Christ that the world works with assume the narrative of power and strength. The truth we need to remember is quite the opposite.

The truth that suffering and loss is intrinsic to the Christian religion and to our own lives as believers means that church shootings, religious persecution, and difficulty shouldn’t be the exception for Christians. We should understand comfort and ease to be the real exceptions.

Remembering Dr. Morton H. Smith (Dr. Joseph A. Pipa)

Dr. Morton H. Smith, founding professor of Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS), founder of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary (GPTS), first Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), and one of the world’s foremost authorities on American Presbyterian history and theology, passed into glory on Sunday, November 12, 2017. He was 93 years old.

He was the fourth of five sons born to James Brookes and Margaret Morton Smith of Roanoke, Virginia on December 11, 1923. His early childhood was characterized by a love for the mountains of western Virginia and a heartfelt commitment to Christ from a young age. The Smith family maintained an active membership in the Raleigh Court Presbyterian Church, where Mr. Smith served as a Ruling Elder until they moved to the Mt. Washington area of Baltimore, Maryland.

It was at the Mt. Washington Presbyterian Church that Dr. Smith publicly professed his faith in Jesus Christ. Later on in life, Dr. Smith would credit Pastor James E. Moore with having the greatest influence on his life outside of his parents. The elders received Dr. Smith as a communing member when he was eleven years old. During the membership interview, the senior elder of the session asked Dr. Smith, “What does Jesus mean to you?” The generally shy young man expressed his love for Christ when, choking up, he eked out an answer that communicated, “He means everything to me, and I trust Him as my Savior.”

In the Spring of 1941, Dr. Smith graduated from the St. Paul’s School for Boys in Baltimore. He enrolled at the University of Michigan that Fall to study Forestry. In his first year at Michigan, he met his future wife, Miss. Lois Knopf. They married on June 30, 1944 while Dr. Smith was serving as a military flight instructor during World War II. After graduating with a degree in Botany in 1947, he accepted a position as the office manager in the Registrar’s office.

The Lord used teaching and preaching opportunities at Grace Bible Church (Miss. Lois’ home church) to call Dr. Smith to the gospel ministry. He enrolled at Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, Georgia in the Fall of 1949. While at Columbia, Dr. Smith gravitated to the last remaining confessional professor at the seminary, Dr. William Childs Robinson. Recognizing the entrenched theological liberalism of the institution as a whole, the Smiths decided to transfer to Westminster Theological Seminary in the Fall of 1950.

The Smiths spent one year at Westminster, and Dr. Smith later recalled it as the most intellectually stimulating year of his life. He particularly profited from time spent with Dr. Cornelius Van Til and Professor John Murray. Though their year in Philadelphia was a great blessing to the Smiths, Dr. John R. Richardson of Westminster Presbyterian Church in Atlanta convinced them to return to a denominational seminary of the Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUS) in order to prepare for ministry in that body. Dr. Smith completed his studies at Columbia Theological Seminary in December of 1952.

Like many students of Columbia Seminary at the time, Dr. Smith was active in pastoral and preaching ministry while pursuing his degree. In 1952, he was ministering to an unaffiliated core group of believers in Valdosta, GA who ultimately organized as a congregation of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). After consulting with Dr. Van Til and PCUS missionary to Japan Dr. David McIlwaine, both of whom urged Dr. Smith to remain in the PCUS in order to maintain a confessional witness within the Southern Presbyterian church, he elected to pursue a call in the PCUS. In 1954, he accepted a call to a two-church field: Springfield-Roller, near Baltimore, MD.

That same year, however, he received a call to teach Bible at Belhaven Colleg in Jackson, MS. He would hold that position until 1963. It was during this time that the Smiths adopted Samuel and Suzanne in 1958 and 1962, respectively. In 1962, he completed his Doctor of Philosophy degree on a Fulbright Fellowship to the Free University of Amsterdam, under the tutelage of Professor G.C. Berkouwer. His doctoral dissertation is in publication under the title, Studies in Southern Presbyterian Theology. In 1963, Westminster Theological Seminary invited Dr. Smith to join the faculty as a guest lecturer in practical theology.

In 1964, the Smiths moved to French Camp, MS to serve on the faculty of what would become Reformed Theological Seminary. Dr. Smith taught classes in several locations around the country, locations to which he would travel by plane in his own Cessna 150. He would fly his plane all over the continental United States as both a professor and a churchman for decades, finally selling his last aircraft in 1988.

Dr. Smith was on the original faculty in the Fall of 1966, when Reformed Theological Seminary commenced classes with 17 students. He taught there until 1978, at which point his role as Stated Clerk of the PCA grew into a full-time responsibility. The Steering Committee of the Continuing Presbyterian Church (what would become the PCA) commissioned Dr. Smith to produce a book outlining a rationale for separating from the PCUS. How is the Gold Become Dim was published shortly before the Continuing Church met in December of 1973. At that first meeting of the Continuing Church, the gathered elders elected Dr. Smith to serve as Clerk at the Convocation of Sessions and at the First General Assembly of the fledgling church. He would continue in this role until 1988, serving the new denomination which from its start devoted itself to three great aims: to be faithful to the Scriptures, true to the Reformed faith, and obedient to the Great Commission.

In 1978, once he began to work full-time as Stated Clerk. Toward the end of his tenure as Stated Clerk, Dr. Smith began working with a group of elders from Second Presbyterian Church in Greenville, SC to establish an Old School Presbyterian Seminary in Upstate South Carolina. In the Fall of 1987, Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary began classes to equip preachers, pastors, and churchmen for Christ’s Kingdom.

After resigning as Stated Clerk of the PCA, Dr. Smith continued to serve on denominational committees, take an active part in the Western Carolina Presbytery of the PCA, and participate in the life of Cornerstone PCA in Brevard, NC. He also traveled extensively around the world to teach, preach, and train pastors in many different countries: South Africa, South Korea, the Czech Republic, Brazil, Russia, and New Zealand. In 2013, the Board of Trustees of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary named a Chair in Systematic Theology in honor of Dr. Smith.

Generations of his students will remember him as a godly, gentle, and quiet man of strong Christian character and conviction. As a scholar, he was committed to the depth and breadth of the Reformed tradition, founded upon the rock-solid foundation of God’s Word. His was an exegetically grounded theology. Committed to preparing and equipping Reformed ministers, his academic work flowed out of the instruction which he provided to his students. As a true child of God, Dr. Smith had a humble, simple faith in Christ. For Dr. Morton Smith, all true doctrinal inquiry finds its ultimate terminus in Christ. He loved to talk about and preach Christ.

The PCA recognized his contribution as one of the founding fathers of the denomination when the 28th General Assembly (2000) elected him to serve as Moderator. To date, he appears to be the last bearded moderator of the PCA General Assembly.

In a festschrift published in honor of Dr. Smith’s eightieth birthday in 2004, I described Dr. Smith’s influence on the PCA in no uncertain terms: “no man has had a more profound impact on the early development of this denomination than he.” Reformed Theological Seminary Chancellor and CEO Dr. J. Ligon Duncan III, who studied “The Theology of the Westminster Standards” under Dr. Smith at Covenant Theological Seminary, identified him as both a family friend and “one of the key figures in late twentieth-century North American Presbyterianism.” Reformed Theological Seminary Professor Emeritus Dr. Douglas F. Kelly commended Dr. Smith as a man who has “stood for what he understands to be God’s truth no matter how offensive it has been to the spirit of the age.”

In the last few years of his life, Dr. Smith enjoyed receiving guests into his home, many of whom were students and colleagues from various seasons of his life. He also lovingly cared for his wife as her health declined more rapidly than his. It was only a severe stroke on Thursday, November 2, 2017 that caused him to pass more quickly into glory.

We thank God for the life and legacy of Dr. Morton Howison Smith, even as we mourn his death. Yet our loss is his gain. As the Westminster Shorter Catechism teaches in Q. & A. 37, “The souls of believers are at their death made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; and their bodies, being still united in Christ, do rest in their graves til the resurrection.” Having passed into glory, Dr. Morton Smith is now perfect in holiness, beholding his beloved Christ.

Preaching and the Mission of the Trinity (Ryan McGraw)

Every divine work reflects God’s Triunity. This means that if we want to understand what God is doing in our lives we must begin with who God is. The Father always acts through his Son and by his Spirit. We come to the Father, by the Spirit, through the Son (Eph. 2:18). Preaching in relation to other biblical topics is like the relationship of countries to continents and continents to the world. Preaching must fit into the broader picture of the plan and work of the triune God.

John 4:21-24 gives us insight into the theological world in which preaching is found by describing the goal of evangelism. There we find Jesus telling the woman at the well, “Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:21-24). Since the Father is seeking people to worship him in Spirit and in Truth, preaching should aim to produce people who worship the Father by the Spirit through the Son. Relating preaching to the work of the Trinity is important because it ties together what preaching is, its necessity, its manner, and its aims in light of the doctrine of God, which is the center of the theological universe of Scripture.

First, the Father is seeking worshipers (v. 23). Worship is the primary purpose of life and worship is the primary context of this passage. Jews and Samaritans had no dealings with one another (v. 9) because they disagreed sharply over how to worship God. Jesus promised to give the woman of Samaria living water that would satisfy her thirsty soul, giving her eternal life (v. 10-14). When she wanted this water, Jesus confronted her with the fact that she had had five husbands (v. 1…

Continue Reading at Reformation21 Blog

End of year giving

reformation21 is the online magazine of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting reformation21 and the mission of the Alliance. Please donate here.

The Church’s Answer to Racism and Sexism (Jason Helopoulos)

Racist attitudes, bigoted actions, rape, and assault have recently been dominating the news cycle. In the midst of chaos in our culture, the Church has the great answer to racism, sexism, and classism. We have the answer and we are to show it. The world needs our voice and our example.

Paul says in Colossians 3:11, “Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all.” He then provides a list of virtues that are to mark the Christian’s life: compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience.” Paul says that we are to forgive one another and love one another. And then in verse fifteen, he asserts, “And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful.”

The Christian is to have the peace of Christ ruling his or her heart. Colossians 3:15 has often been misunderstood. Paul is not thinking primarily about how the Christian is to feel. He has in mind our peace in the fellowship of the church. Notice, he qualifies it by “to which indeed you were called in one body.” Peace serves as the arbiter in our dealings with one another. It reigns as the umpire. There will be times that difficulties arise in the church, in our community. But when problems arise, the peace of Christ jumps in and mediates. It rules in our community.

When a baseball player hits an infield grounder to the shortstop and he picks up the ball and fires it home just as the runner from third is sliding into home plate, debate ensues. As kids on the neighborhood diamond, we would argue till someone gave up. “He was safe,” one would argue. “No, he was out,” someone else would contend. That may occur even in the Major Leagues. However, when the umpire steps forward and says, “Safe,” the matter is concluded. The dissension is over. When Christ occupies our lives, the peace of Christ will rule our fellowship. It serves as the arbiter. It is the umpire.

I believe Paul espe…

Continue Reading at Reformation21 Blog

End of year giving

reformation21 is the online magazine of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting reformation21 and the mission of the Alliance. Please donate here.

Trinity: The Two Natures of Christ (Robert Brady)

In this new 8 message set, Trinity: The Two Natures of Christ, Liam Goligher continues his study of the Trinity from the Book of Hebrews. Visit the Trinity web page to learn more about what sparked this sermon series.If Christians confuse what is true of Jesus Christ as a human being with what is true of the Eternally Divine Son, they make very serious errors indeed. The most obvious is to conflate the exaltation of the Son of God from all eternity with the welcome given by the Father to the God-Man Christ Jesus, who redeemed God’s elect through a sacrificial death. So, in these great teachings, a course correction is long overdue. We must adore Jesus Christ our Lord, both fully Son of Man and fully Son of God.Messages in this series include: • Mary, Did You Know? • Better By Design • Heirs of Salvation • In the Train of His Triumph • Lower Than the Angels • What If God Was One of Us? • The Son and His Family • After the PassionTrinity: The Two Natures of Christ is available from ReformedResources.org on CDs or as MP3 on CD or MP3 downloads….

Continue Reading at Reformation21 Blog

End of year giving

reformation21 is the online magazine of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. It is supported only by its readers and gracious Christians like you. Please prayerfully consider supporting reformation21 and the mission of the Alliance. Please donate here.