Download pdf - Sound of Grace, Issue 188, June 2012

7/30/2019 Sound of Grace, Issue 188, June 2012

1/20

love is so difficult.

So if our fallen nature is selfish, how can we live self-

lessly? The short answer is that we cant, but God can. The

power for selfless living comes from God. The Holy Spirit

empowers us to love cruciformly. How though? One of

the main ways is by exalting Christ in our hearts. Romans

5 says that we have been justified by faith and have peace

with God through our Lord Jesus Christ and that Gods

love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy

Spirit (Rom. 5:1-5). The Holy Spirit has a floodlight

ministry.

J.I. Packer writes, When floodlighting is well done,

the floodlights are placed

In this series of articles we have been seeking to see how the New Testa-ment Scriptures interpret Old Testament kingdom prophecies. Does the New

Testament interpret the Old Testament as literal, meaning using natural

language, or does the New Testament spiritualize the Old Testament kingdom

promises? We have been testing one of the basic hermeneutical principles of

Dispensational theology called the literal, grammatical, historical, method

of interpretation. In this method, every word is understood in its literal or natu-

ral meaning. The word man means a real man, and the word lion means a

real four legged lion, house means house, etc. NCT will agree we should use

this method when interpreting books like Romans and the gospel of John but

not when interpreting symbolic books like the Song of Solomon or the book

of Revelation. All agree that the context will force a symbolic interpretation of

some texts. In a previous article we dem-

onstrated this with the following texts from

Is s ue 1 8 8 June 2 0 1 2

It is good fo r the heart to be stre ngthened by grace Hebrews 13:9

New Covenant Theology

and Prophecy #6

John G. Reisinger

Where does love come from? In this series of articles,

we have been called to a love that cannot come from

ourselves! We have said that the primary virtue for new

covenant Christians is cruciform love. This is cross-shapedlove. It is the pattern of giving of self for the good of oth-

ers. It is a call to selfless living. The call to selflessness is

extremely hard!

Sin is fundamentally selfishness. It started in the garden

of Eden. Adam and Eve wanted autonomy (self-rule), and

the sons and daughters of Adam have been plagued by the

same disease ever since. Isaiah described us as straying

sheep. We have all gone astray. We have all turned to our

own way. This is why Luther said that since the fall, hu-

manity is curved in on ourselves. This is why cruciform

The Power for Cruciform Love:

1 Thessalonians 4:8-9

A. Blake White

ReisingerContinued on page 2

WhiteContinued on page 12

In This Issue

New Covenant Theologyand Prophecy #6

John G. Reisinger1

The Power for Cruciform Love:1 Thessalonians 4:8-9

A. Blake White1

Postmodernism andChristianity, Enemies? Part 2

Steve West

3

A Wise Man Who Built HisHouse on the Rock

Stan F. Vaninger

5

Outside the BoxJohn G. Reisinger

7

Warfield on the Divine Originof the Bible

Fred G. Zaspel9

Our PurposeJohn G. Reisinger 13


2/20

Page 2 June 2012 Issue 188

Sound of Grace is a publication of SovereignGrace New Covenant Ministries, a tax exempt501(c)3 corporation. Contributions to Soundof Grace are deductible under section 170 ofthe Code.

Sound of Grace is published 10 times a year.The subscription price is shown below. This isa paper unashamedly committed to the truthof Gods sovereign grace and New Covenant

Theology. We invite all who love these sametruths to pray for us and help us financially.

We do not take any paid advertising.

The use of an article by a particular personis not an endorsement of all that personbelieves, but it merely means that we thoughtthat a particular article was worthy of printing.

Sound of Grace Board: John G. Reisinger,John Thorhauer, Bob VanWingerden andJacob Moseley.

Editor: John G. Reisinger; Phone: (585)396-3385; e-mail: [email protected].

General Manager: Jacob Moseley:[email protected]

Send all orders and all subscriptions to:Sound of Grace, 5317 Wye Creek Drive,Frederick, MD 21703-6938 Phone 301-473-8781 Visit the bookstore: http://www.newcovenantmedia.com

Address all editorial mater ial and questionsto: John G. Reisinger, 3302 County Road 16,Canandaigua, NY 14424-2441.

Webpage: www.soundofgrace.org orSOGNCM.org

Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are takenfrom the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNA-TIONAL VERSION Copyright 1973, 1978,1984 by International Bible Society. Used by

Permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked NKJV are takenfrom the New King James Version. Copyright 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used byPermission. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are fromThe Holy Bible, English Standard Version,copyright 2001 by Crossway Bibles, adivision of Good News Publishers. Used bypermission. All rights reserved.

ContributionsOrders

Discover, MasterCard or VISA

If you wish to make a tax-deductible contribu-tion to Sound of Grace, please mail a checkto: Sound of Grace, 5317 Wye Creek Drive,Frederick, MD 21703-6938.

Please check the mailing label to findthe expiration of your subscription. Pleasesend payment if you want your subscriptionto continue$20.00 for ten issues. Or if youwould prefer to have a pdffile emailed, that isavailable for $10.00 for ten issues. If you areunable to subscribe at this time, please callor drop a note in the mail and we will be gladto continue sending Sound of Grace free ofcharge.

ReisingerContinued from page 1


Psalm 22 and Isaiah 11.

Manybulls have compassed me:

strong bulls of Bashan have beset me

round. They gaped upon me with their

mouths, as a ravening and aroaring

lionFordogs have compassed me

Psalm 22:12, 13 &16.

No one would insist that four

legged bulls, four legged dogs and

four legged roaring lions were gath-

ered around the cross. The text is

describing, in symbolic language, two

legged men who were acting like mad

bulls, furious lions and barking dogs.

All interpreters, including the most die

-hard Dispensationalists, will agree

that such an interpretation of Psalm

22, is obvious and clearly demon-strated by the context. The language

in these texts cannot be taken in a lit-

eral, grammatical, historical sense.

They must be understood symboli-

cally. The problem arises when there

are texts where it is just as obvious,

at least to me, that should be taken

symbolically but the Dispensationalist

says, No, no, we must take the Bible

literally. We must be consistent with

the literal, grammatical, historical

hermeneutic. An example of this is

a text like Isaiah 11:6, 7. In this text

we are told that the wordlion must be

taken literally instead of symbolically

as in Psalm 22.

The wolfalso shall dwell with the

lamb, and the leopardshall lie down

with thekid; and thecalfand the

younglion and thefatling together;

and a little child shall lead them. And

the cow and the bear shall feed; their

young ones shall lie down together:and the lion shall eat straw like theox.

Isa.11:6, 7.

The vital question is what rule of

hermeneutics says roaring lion in

Psalm 22 is symbolic; it means a man

is acting like a wild animal, but the

same word in Isaiah 11 must be taken

literally andmeans a four legged

animal acting totally contrary to his

nature. What makes it obvious that

Psalm 22 is to be understoodsymboli-

cally but Isaiah 11 is to be understood

literally, meaning in natural lan-

guage?

Again, all agree that the context in

Isaiah 11 is talking about the king-

dom Christ would establish. The

question is whether it is describing

the present spiritual kingdom that he

established at his first coming or the

so-called future earthly millennial

kingdom taught by Dispsationalism. Is

Isaiah 11 describing a present spiritual

kingdom or is it describing a literal

physical millennial kingdom in the

future at the second coming as the

Dispensationalist insists.

I agree that Isaiah 11 does not

clearly resolve the problem since thecontext does not absolutely prove

that the lions and lambs must be four

legged or two legged. Lets look at

two Old Testament kingdom proph-

esies that are interpreted for us with

New Testament apostolic authority

and see how New Covenant apostles

interpreted Old Testament prophecies

concerning the kingdom. The first pas-

sage is Jeremiah 31:31-34.

31 Behold, the days come, saiththe LORD, that I will make a new

covenant with the house of Israel, and

with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant

that I made with their fathers in the

day that I took them by the hand to

bring them out of the land of Egypt;

which my covenant they brake, al-

though I was an husband unto them,

saith the LORD:

33 But this shall be the covenant

that I will make with the house of Isra-el; After those days, saith the LORD, I

will put my law in their inward parts,

and write it in their hearts; and will

be their God, and they shall be my

people.

34 And they shall teach no more

every man his neighbour, and every

man his brother, saying, Know the

LORD: for they shall all know me,


3/20

Issue 188 June 2012 Page 3

WestContinued o n page 8

tempt at logical deduction and analy-sis, determined what was true. The

prototypical rationalist in this regard

was Rene Descartes. His dictum

cogito ergo sum, I think therefore

I am, is one of the only statements

most people know from the history of

philosophy. But what led Descartes to

make this claim?

As an adult Descartes realized that

much of what he had been taught as

a child was false. He tried to decidehow he could know for sure what was

true and what was false. His strategy

was to practice methodological doubt.

Everything he could possibly doubt,

he doubted. He doubted his senses.

He doubted that 2 +2 = 4 and that a

triangle had three sides, because if

there were a malevolent spirit or de-

mon, the demon could trick him when

he did simple math, or trick him when

he counted the sides of an object.

Descartes did not take this latter ideavery seriously, but he was searching

for something impossible to doubt,

not just something extraordinarily

improbable.

At last, Descartes mind landed

upon a sure foundation, an idea that

he could not doubt even if he tried.

He could not doubt that he existed,

because he was thinking. In order for

him to doubt, he needed to exist and

think. In order for an evil spirit todeceive him, he needed to exist to be

deceived! So the anchor that Des-

cartes grabbed hold ofand for which

the subsequent history of philosophy

has mercilessly accused him of great

fallacieswas that he was a think-

ing, and therefore existing, being.

From these humble origins, Descartes

sought clear and distinct ideas which

also were impossible to doubt. He

In my first article on this topic, Inoted some typical Christian attitudes

towards postmodernism, and I also

suggested that certain postmodern

concerns are both significant and

right. It is worth repeating that these

concerns should be embraced be-

cause there is a sense in which they

are deeply biblical. The fundamental

problem with postmodernism is not

that everything it says is wrong on

the surface, but that it fails to provide

a total worldview which is capableof grounding its claims. One of the

strengths of postmodernism emerges

when it is compared to the epistemo-

logical project of the Enlightenment.

In fact, Christians can affirm many of

postmodernisms criticisms of mod-

ernism.

A disclaimer: what follows is

going to be extraordinarily brief and

lacking nuance. Furthermore, I am not

suggesting direct causal links in eachof these steps, or that postmodernism

is completely tied in theory to every-

thing which preceded it. What I am

attempting to do is merely to provide

the most basic of orientation points in

the history of Western thought. Once

they have been roughed-in, a lens for

viewing postmodernism will emerge.

Of the utmost significance is the

general failure of Western philosophy,

particularly in epistemology. TheEnlightenment ideal was to cast off

tradition and authority (especially

religious tradition and authority) and

autonomously lay reality bare by hu-

man reason and evidential practices.

Two great epistemological methods

were tried, namely rationalism and

empiricism. Rationalists began with

supposedly indubitable principles or

axioms, and then by a rigorous at-

uses a type of ontological argument

to prove the existence of God (his

ontological argument is, regrettably,

perhaps the least convincing of all

ontological arguments), and from

there argues that since God exists and

is perfectly good and omnipotent,

God would not let the evil spirit trickhim when he does math and performs

simple mental activities. God would

also not allow people to be deceived

by their senses, so Descartes is off to

the races with liberty to trust the de-

liverances of his mind and the deliver-

ances of his senses.

The one thing that Descartes gets

completely right, in my judgment, is

that God is necessary if we are to trust

the deliverances of our senses. Whathe gets completely wrong, in my judg-

ment, is thinking that his ontological

argument is even close to success-

ful. Descartes is left with a failure

to prove the existence of God, and

therefore a failure to provide cogent

foundations for relying on his mind or

senses. In the history of philosophy,

rationalism, the style of reasoning

that begins in the human mind and

looks for indubitable propositions

from which to build a sure system of

knowledge, fails every time. Think-

ing about timeless principles fails to

produce knowledge. (I know that Des-

cartes is not the last rationalist, but his

example is illustrative of the general

problems adhering to all accounts of

nontheistic rationalism.)

There is another epistemological

approach, however, which has also

been tried in the history of philoso-

phy. This approach is called empiri-cism, and it starts with data collected

by the senses. If rationalism wants to

start with timeless axioms, empiri-

cism starts with contingent, temporal

data. Data is gathered as it passes

through the senses, and then it is ana-

lyzed in the mind. Such an approach

sounded promising, but quickly

reached a dead end.

Postmodernism and Christianity

Enemies? Part 2

Steve West


4/20


tal literal. Everyone does both. The

question is who or what establishes

the reason that lion must be symbol-

ized in Psalm 22 and taken literally

in Isaiah 11. The Dispensationalist, in

the New Testament (1 Cor. 11:23-26;

Heb. 8 and 10), takes Jeremiah literal-

ly and spiritualizes the New Testamentinterpretation of it. The non-Dispen-

sationalist does the opposite. He takes

the New Testament interpretation of

Jeremiah as a literal spiritual interpre-

tation of Jeremiah 31. We will admit

without question that if Jeremiah 31

was the only Scripture text to speak of

a new covenant, we would agree that

the new covenant is made with the

nation of Israel and has not yet been

fulfilled. However, both our Lord and

his apostles (1 Cor. 11:23-26; Heb.8 and 10) make it abundantly clear

that the new covenant is made with

the church and the kingdom promise

of the new covenant in Jeremiah 31

is already fulfilled. This is one of the

many examples of how NCT is radi-

cally different in its insistence that the

New Testament must interpret the Old

Testament.

Look at how the writer of the book

of Hebrews understood the promise ofthe new covenant given in Jeremiah

31. After quoting Jeremiah 31:31-34

in Hebrews 10:16-18, the writer ap-

plies the truths of the new covenant

blessing of access into Gods pres-

ence. He is talking about the new

covenant blessing of entering into

the most holy place with assurance

because we are robed in the righ-

teousness of Christ. Christ is the true

high priest over Gods true redeemed

house. The priest he is talking about

is Christ and the house of God over

which this priest reigns is the church.

Read the words carefully and see if

the writer of Hebrews literalizes the

Jeremiah passage or spiritualizes it.

See if he is talking about something

future or something in the present,

talking about the church for which

Christ died or something in the future


from the least of them unto the great-

est of them, saith the LORD: for I

will forgive their iniquity, and I will

remember their sin no more. Jeremiah

31:31-34.

This prophecy is predicting a new

covenant replacing the old covenantmade at Sinai. The prophecy is very

clear that the new covenant will be

made with the house of Israel, and

with the house of Judah. It is said

to be made with the children of the

Israelites who were redeemed out

of Egypt as recorded in the book of

Exodus. The essence of the promised

covenant literally guarantees the full

salvation of the house of Israel, and

the house of Judah. Any honest literal

interpretation of these words, taken by

themselves, demands a new covenant

being made with the house of Israel,

and with the house of Judahwhereby

every member of the house of Israel

and the house of Judah would be re-

generated and justified. If the literal,

historical and grammatical herme-

neutic is correct, then the Dispensa-

tionalist is correct in his understanding

of the animals in Isaiah 11. The new

covenant, as promised in Jeremiah 31,beyond question guarantees the future

salvation of Israel. The literal, gram-

matical and historical hermeneutic

demands this understanding. The

problem is that such an idea cannot

be made to agree with the New Testa-

ment. The New Testament is quite

clear that the new covenant promised

in Jeremiah has nothing to do with a

future conversion of Israel. The new

covenant is already fulfilled. Accord-

ing to both Jesus and the apostles, thepromised new covenant in Jeremiah

31 is made with the church, not with

Israel. The New Testament spiritual-

izes the house of Israel in Jeremiah

31 to mean the church. Notice that our

Lords understanding of the prophecy

of the new covenant states it is made

with the church, not with Israel.

23 For I have received of the Lord

that which also I delivered unto you,

that the Lord Jesus the same night in

which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks,

he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is

my body, which is broken for you: this

do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also

he took the cup, when he had supped,saying, this cup is the new testament

[NIV, covenant] in my blood: this do

ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remem-

brance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this

bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew

the Lords death till he come. 1 Cor.

11:23-26.

The new covenant established by

our Lord has nothing to do with either

Israels future conversion or their res-toration to the Holy Land. It has to do

with his atoning sacrifice on the cross

for the elect or the church. Neither

Israel nor the land is mentioned in

this passage. It is clear that our Lord

spiritualized Jeremiah 31 and ap-

plied the promise of the new covenant

to the church for which he shed his

blood. Some Dispensationalists, seek-

ing to explain the obvious problem

with their understanding of the new

covenant, have said there are two newcovenants, one for Israel, which is still

future, and another one for Gentiles

which is present. It is impossible to

get any such idea into the texts. Just

as Jeremiah 31:31-34 would need a

literal physical kingdom to fulfill

it if the literal, historical, grammati-

cal hermeneutic was correct, so our

Lords words when instituting the

Lords Supper demands the new cov-

enant must be spiritualized to apply to

the church and the kingdom of grace.

You cannot demand a literal fulfill-

ment of the promise in Jeremiah 31

and then spiritualize the New Testa-

ment interpretation of the same text.

It is obvious that our Lord did not

follow a literal, historical, grammati-

cal interpretation of the old covenant

promise of a new covenant. The

choice is not spiritualize versus to-ReisingerContinued on page 6


5/20


of a house. In Proverbs 9:1 we read,

Wisdom has built her house. Prov-

erbs 14:1 says, The wise woman

builds her house, but the foolish pulls

it down with her hands. The latter

example combines the wise/foolish

contrast and the use of house.

Proverbs 12:7 is similar, The

wicked are overthrown and are no

more, but the house of the righteous

will stand. We see the contrast be-

tween wisdom and folly as expressed

by righteousness and wickedness of

life, and also the use of house to

speak of ones life.

Proverbs 24:3-4 emphasizes the

positive, Through wisdom a house

is built, and by understanding it is

established; by knowledge the rooms

are filled with all precious and pleas-

ant riches. The writer is not speaking

about building a literal house but uses

figurative language to speak about us,

about our lives, about acquiring wis-

dom. Look again at Matthew 7:24-25.

Jesus simile here of likening life withits trials and tribulations to a house

enduring a storm comes right out of

the fabric of Proverbs.

While few commentators point it

out, This parable of the two houses

[in Matthew 7] is a clear allusion to

the two houses of Proverbs 9 The

person who hears and acts on Jesus

words is like a wise person who builds

his or her house on a rock so that it

can withstand the worst weather.4Proverbs 9 speaks figuratively of two

ways of living, the way of wisdom

4 Craig G. Bartholomew, Ryan P.

ODowd, Old Testament Wisdom

Literature: A Theological Introduc-

tion, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity

Press, 2011), 240. Bartholomew and

ODowd give credit to Ben Withering-

ton III,Jesus the Sage: The Pilgrim-

age of Wisdom, 356-357 for this

observation.VaningerContinued on page 15

A Wise Man Who Built His House on the Rock

Stan F. Vaninger24Everyone then who hears these

words of mine and does them will be

like a wise man who built his house on

the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and thefloods came, and the winds blew and

beat on that house, but it did not fall,

because it had been founded on the

rock. 26 And everyone who hears these

words of mine and does not do them

will be like a foolish man who built his

house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell,

and thefloods came, and the winds

blew and beat against that house,

and it fell, and great was the fall of it.

(Matt 7 ESV)

These four verses are the closingwords of the famous Sermon on the

Mount. Yet they are very different

from the rest of the sermon. These

words, in fact, are reminiscent of

the language of Proverbs. Jesus

employs typical wisdom language

familiar to Jewish sages.1 He uses

the speech forms of a wisdom teacher

(parables) and claims to be the source

of true wisdom.2

Jesus does not quote directly fromProverbs, but important concepts

from Proverbs are lying right on the

surface. Jesus here speaks of the wise

man and the foolish man which is a

familiar theme in Proverbs.3 Proverbs

also frequently uses the metaphor

1 Craig S. Keener, Commentary on the

Gospel of Matthew, (Grand Rapids,

MI: Eerdmans, 1999), 254.

2 Graeme Goldsworthy,According To

Plan: The Unfolding Revelation ofGod in the Bible, (Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press, 1991), 206.

3 Hagner points out that wise and

foolish are favorites of Matthew as

opposed to the other gospel writers.

Matthew uses wise 7 times and fool-

ish6 times; only Luke uses wise

(twice) and the other 3 gospel writ-

ers use foolish not at all. Donald A.

Hagner, WBC Volume 33A:Matthew

1-13, (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993),

190-191.

and the way of folly; the way of righ-

teousness and the way of wickedness.

It is perhaps significant that Jesusdoes not quote directly from Prov-

erbs. He could have. He could have

quoted Proverbs 1:7, The fear of the

Lord is the beginning of wisdom, but

fools despise wisdom and instruction.

But he didnt. He could have quoted

Proverbs 9:10, The fear of the Lord

is the beginning of wisdom, and the

knowledge of the Holy One is insight.

These proverbs speak directly to

the issue of the source of true wis-

dom which is found only in the trueCreator-God. But Jesus didnt quote

them.

The words of Proverbs 1:7 and

9:10 were just as true and just as

edifying in the time of Christ as they

were in OT times. But Jesus didnt

quote them. So what did he do? He

said that whoever hears and follows

his words is the wise man. Jesus lays

claim to being the source of true

wisdom.

So something has changed with the

coming of Christ. Actually, a lot has

changed. The fear of the Lord has

been replaced by following Christ.

Its not that there was anything wrong

with the fear of the Lord. Those

verses in Proverbs are still just as true

as they ever were. But they have a

greater meaning and significance with

the coming of Christthe wisdom of

God (1 Cor. 1:24).

What we see here is one large

step forward in Gods progressive

revelation of himself and the way of

salvation. God has come to this earth

in the person of Christ and, through

the incarnation, has become the

embodiment of the wisdom of God.

Paul says so in 1 Corinthians 1:30

Christ Jesusbecame for us wisdom


6/20



deliverance, as the LORD hath said,

and in the remnant whom the LORD

shall call.

The kingdom promise made in Joel

2:28-32 is a passage that will test your

consistency in your hermeneutics.

How much of this prophecy should we

take literally and how much shouldwe spiritualize? How much of the

prophecy was fulfilled at Pentecost

and how much awaits a future fulfill-

ment? The first question that must

be asked is simple and, if we really

believe the Old Testament must be

interpreted with the New Testament,

is clearly answered in Acts in Peters

sermon on the Day of Pentecost. Peter

tells us how to understand Joel 2:28-

32.

12 And they were all amazed, and

were in doubt, saying one to another,What meaneth this?

13 Others mocking said, These men

are full of new wine.

14 But Peter, standing up with the

eleven, lifted up his voice, and said

unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and allye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this

known unto you, and hearken to my

words:

15 For these are not drunken, asye suppose, seeing it is but the third

hour of the day.

16 But this is that which was spoken

by the prophet Joel;

17 And it shall come to pass in the

last days, saith God, I will pourout of my Spirit upon allflesh: and

your sons and your daughters shall

prophesy, and your young men shall

see visions, and your old men shalldream dreams:

18 And on my servants and on my

handmaidens I will pour out in those

days of my Spirit; and they shall

prophesy:

19 And I will shew wonders inheaven above, and signs in the earth

beneath; blood, andfire, and vapour

of smoke:

20 The sun shall be turned intodarkness, and the moon into blood,

before the great and notable day of

pertaining to Israel and the land. Does

the writer to the Hebrews literalize or

spiritualize Jeremiah 31:31-34?

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also

is a witness to us: for after that he had

said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will

make with them after those days, saith

the Lord, I will put my laws into their

hearts, and in their minds will I write

them;

17 And their sins and iniquities

will I remember no more.

18 Now where remission of these

is, there is no more offering for sin.

19 Having therefore, brethren,

boldness to enter into the holiest by

the blood of Jesus,

20 By a new and living way, which

he hath consecrated for us, through

the veil, that is to say, hisflesh;

21 And having an high priest over

the house of God;

22 Let us draw near with a true

heart in full assurance of faith, having

our hearts sprinkled from an evil con-

science, and our bodies washed with

pure water. Hebrews 10:15-22.

The second kingdom prophecy we

want to look at is Joel 2:28-32.

28 And it shall come to pass af-

terward, that I will pour out my spirit

upon allflesh; and your sons and your

daughters shall prophesy, your old

men shall dream dreams, your young

men shall see visions:

29 And also upon the servants and

upon the handmaids in those days will

I pour out my spirit.

30 And I will shew wonders in the

heavens and in the earth, blood, and

fire, and pillars of smoke.

31 The sun shall be turned into

darkness, and the moon into blood,

before the great and terrible day of the

LORD come.

32 And it shall come to pass, that

whosoever shall call on the name of

the LORD shall be delivered: for in

mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be

the Lord come:

21 And it shall come to pass, that

whosoever shall call on the name of

the Lord shall be saved. Acts 2:12-

21.

When the crowd heard many dif-

ferent tongues being spoken, some

accused the speakers of being drunk.They asked, What does this mean?

Peter assured them the men speak-

ing were not drunk. He told them the

things they were seeing were evidence

that Joels prophecy was being ful-

filled. The kingdom God had prom-

ised had come. The events of Pente-

cost proved it. Peter declared, this is

that which was spoken by the prophet

Joel. Peter definitely saw the events

of Pentecost as fulfi

lling the prophecyof Joel. The kingdom Joel foretold

was coming had come. Joels proph-

ecy was fulfilled at Pentecost. Dispen-

sationalism, in order to be consistent,

must take Joels words literally but

cannot take Peters words literally.

This is obviously a real problem. One

way out of their dilemma is to deny

that Pentecost is a real fulfillment

of Joels prophecy. Instead of taking

Peter literally, they make Peters

words to mean the events of Pentecostare only a type, a fore-shadowing of a

future event. Peter is not saying Joels

prophecy is literally fulfilled, he is

only saying it is kind of a foretaste, or

type, of the real thing. An example of

this view is found in the comments in

John MacArthurs Study Bible in his

introduction to the book of Joel.

A second issue confronting the

interpreter is Peters quotation from

Joel 2:28-32 in Acts 2:16-21. Somehave viewed the phenomena of Acts

2 and the destruction of Jerusalem in

AD 70 as the fulfillment of the Joel

passage, while others have reserved its

fulfillment to the final Day of the Lord

onlybut clearly Joel is referring to

the terrible Day of the Lord. The pour-

ing out of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost

is not a fulfillment, but a preview and

sample of the Spirits power and work,



7/20


Outside the BoxContinued on page 18

I once was introduced at a Bible

Conference as a person who knew

how to think outside the box. I

responded, It depends on what box

you are talking about. The phrase,

thinking outside the box, means

different things to different people.

Sometimes, we use it to describeindividuals within a society or culture

who refuse to allow the dictums of

the majority or tradition to rule their

thinking. Within a religious context,

liberal Christians sometimes use the

phrase to describe their rejection of

certain orthodox positions, namely, of

the Bible as the inspired Word of God,

and their subsequent refusal to govern

their lives according to the dictates of

Scripture. Some liberals go so far as to

accuse Christians who are committedto the inspiration and integrity of

Scripture of checking their brains at

the front door of the church. Yet those

who adopt this position fail to realize

that they have created their own box:

a box of unbelief about Gods Word

that restricts their thoughts and shapes

their actions.

For most of my Christian life, I

have tried to think outside the box

of traditionalism while still reveringtradition. I have gladly honored the

fathers in the faith, especially the

Puritans and the Reformers, without

worshipping them or their writings. I

have not failed to write about some of

the atrocities of which some Puritans

and some Reformers were guilty. I see

tradition, when it follows Scripture,

to be a great help. I see traditionalism,

which is tradition for its own sake,

as a man-made box that has shackled

the minds of many. Tradition and

traditionalism are two different things.

Robert Dittmar was my mentor in

some vital areas of my thinking. One

of his favorite statements was, We

must think Gods thoughts after him.

Robert emphasized how the authors of

Scripture constantly urge their readers

to think and to test and try all things

with Gods Word. However, he also

constantly reminded me that I was not

free to sit in judgment of the rightness

or wrongness of what the Bible says.We were to think outside of all man-

made boxes but not to think outside

the box of Scripture. I have applied

Roberts lessons by insisting that

those who read or hear my messages

have the right and the duty to judge

my interpretation of what God says,

but that no one has a right to pass

judgment on what the Bible says. In

Bible classes, I insisted that we test

every interpretation so that no person

becomes a law unto themselves, butthat we must never question what God

has actually said in his Word. We must

prove all things; hold fast that which

is good (1 Thess. 5:21), and the

yardstick we use to test all things is

the Bible itself. That is the verse I put

in the front of every book I am asked

to autograph.

Under the guise of supposed

intellectual honesty, I have watched

both men and women I deeply lovestart to think outside the box of

Scripture. This happens through many

different influences. It may be an

overwhelming desire for recognition

as having a superior intellect. Another

is the quest for fame. Or it may be

something as simple as the influence

of a university professor. The end

is always disaster: the rejection of

the authority of Scripture. A few

of these people have claimed me

as their mentor. I deny them as in

any way being my students. They

have confused my constant urging

them to think outside the box with

a fictional right to be independent

of the authority of Scripture. I have

indeed urged people to learn to think

independently and to acquire a formal

education if possible, but I never in

any way intimated or implied that

thinking outside the box extended to

the rejection of the inspiration and

authority of Scripture.

It is likely that some of these who

have apostatized will accuse me,

along with my Bible-believing friends

of blind faith and of living with my

head in the sand. It is not, however,

a question of faith versus no faith.

All men and women are believers.

All have faith, and all live by their

faith. Some people believe lies. Some

place their faith in God and in his

revelationthe Bible. Others believe

lies and place their faith in themselves

and their right to think and act as they

please. The people who have given up

their biblical faithwho think outside

the box of the Biblecontinue to live

by faith: they merely have changedthe object of their faith. Instead of

trusting the word of an apostle of

Christ, they trust the word of another.

Instead of being boxed in by an

inspired, unchanging word from God,

they are boxed into trusting the ever-

changing philosophies of the world of

pseudo-intellectuals.

Shortly after my conversion, I

took some college courses. I was

completely unprepared for theattack on my faith in Scripture that I

experienced. I thought that I should

have been able to answer any and

every objection by my non-Christian

professors. I started to research every

question that these professors raised.

I soon realized that I would have to

spend all my waking hours studying

nothing but these objections. I would

have to become a scholar in every

disciplineto know everything there

was to knowif I were to answerall the objections. It occurred to me,

however, that every discipline had

within it godly men and women who

had wrestled with the objections

salient to theirfields and who still

believed the Bible. There were

Christians who were psychiatrists,

Christians who were historians,

Christians who were scientists (in

Outside the Box

John G. Reisinger


8/20

Page 8 June 2012 Issue 188WestContinued fr om page 3

The British Empiricists (John

Locke, George Berkeley, and Da-

vid Hume) followed the empiricist

approach to its termination point.

Locke, the first thinker, believed that

all knowledge comes to us through

our senses, but since the data comesthrough our senses, we cannot know

for sure what the object we perceive is

actually like. We need to trust that our

senses dont distort the external world,

but how could we really ever know

this? We can know how our senses

represent the external world to our

minds, but there is one crucial step

between our minds and the external

object, and that step is the mediated

route through our senses.

It was David Hume who really

brought empiricism to its logical con-

clusion, and in so doing showed that it

was a failure to provide a sound basis

for knowledge. Hume demonstrated

that we often see things in what we

observe that we cannot really see.

His famous example is of a billiard

ball: one ball is shot into a second

ball, and the second ball moves. We

say that the first ball caused the

second ball to move. But we did notsee causation. All we saw was the

first ball move, touch the second ball,

and then the second ball move. At no

time did we actually see a cause, or

causation. On empirical grounds, the

data of our senses does not include

causation; it only includes sequence.

To argue that a repeatedly observed

sequence shows causation is to miss

the point: we never see causation.

Speaking of causation is, as Hume

declared, just a manner of speaking

by habit or custom.

In the final analysis, what we end

up with are sensations, and sensations

alone. We get a bit of light, a waft of

odor, feel some warmth, etc., but we

combine these impressions into units

in our minds. A strict empiricist,

however, has no grounds to accept the

bundling of impressions into units.

All sensations are discrete and indi-

vidual: how can we know that they

are related to one another the way our

mind pictures them? Well, to make

a long story short, we cant. We are

left with skepticism, if we are simply

logically faithful enough in our philo-

sophical empiricism. Beyond that,we are also left without ourselves:

Hume argues that our sense of self is

likewise constructed into a unit by

bundling sensations, but this is just as

illegitimate for personal identity as it

is for constructing external reality. In

other words, we lose causation, genu-

ine knowledge of the external world,

and ourselves. Empiricism logically

loses everything.

So we begin with rationalism, withtimeless truths in our minds rather

than with data gathered by the senses.

Where do we end up? Skepticism.

Since that doesnt work, we take a

new path and begin with sense data

and empiricism. Where do we end up?

Skepticism. We can even try, like Im-

manuel Kant, to posit transcendental

preconditions for human experience.

What are we left with? At best we can

have knowledge about our own minds

and how we experience things, but wecant know anything at all about what

anything outside of our mind is like.

There are two totally different realms:

the phenomenological realm of our in-

terior mental life, and the mysterious

noumenological world, where things

as they actually are exist (a world

which we will never know). In fact,

even this is granting a lot, because it

is granting a personal identity, a my

to whom belongs my mind, etc. On

what logical grounds do we warrant

our claim to be a singular personal

identity persisting through time? Both

rationalism and empiricism end up in

a self-stultifying, skeptical swamp.

Part of the charm and success of

postmodernism is it candidly recog-

nizes the abysmal failure of the En-

lightenment epistemological project. I

would much rather categorize myself

with the post-Enlightenment crowd

than with the Enlightenment folk.

The Enlightenment project has failed,

and I see no way of reviving it. If you

start with the human mind and hu-

man experience and try to figure out

reality, you fail. Not only do you fail

to figure out reality, but you lose thehuman mind and intelligible experi-

ence to boot. And that is not just a

trivial philosophical failure; that is an

unmitigated human disaster.

In many ways, I think a good argu-

ment can be made that postmodern-

ism is not post-modern at all. I have

heard the relationship expressed in

two different ways, depending on per-

spective. The first is that postmodern-

ism is Enlightenment rationality goneto seed. The second is that postmod-

ernism is really hyper-modernism, or

what modernism actually is when it

is brought to its logical conclusion. I

favor the second image, while seeing

truth in both. In my judgment, when

the Enlightenment decided to embark

on a quest to figure out reality through

autonomous human beings, it was

guaranteed to fail. Postmodernism is

helping us see this failure firsthand. It

has taken a few centuries for philoso-phers to work through some of the

implications of Enlightenment episte-

mology (and theyre not done yet), but

modernisms epistemological quest

was a fools errand. Postmodernism

isnt so much new as it is the conclu-

sion of a long chain of human think-

ing. It took a long time to get here, but

this result was latently tucked back in

the Enlightenment premises from day

one.

Before getting upset with post-

moderns for suggesting that all truths

are relative, perhaps we should get up-

set with moderns for suggesting there

is absolute truth and they can figure it

out for themselves. This latter claim is

frankly more arrogant, and it is just as

philosophically absurd when cashed

out. So I cant help but think that post-

WestContinued on page 18


9/20


Frequently throughout his writ-

ings on the doctrine of Scripture, B.B.

Warfield emphasizes that we believe

in the inspiration of Scripture sim-

ply because Jesus and his appointed

apostles taught it. This for Warfield is

the real issue and deciding factor in

the questionwe hold this doctrine on

Jesus own authority. And, of course,

the noted Theologian of Inspiration

spends much time in the Scriptures

demonstrating this obvious point.

In his The Divine Origin of the

Bible (1882), however, Warfield

surveys the corroborating evidence. If

the Bible is indeed from God, then we

should expect to see evidence of that

fact in both its contents and its effects.

And so he demonstrates that this is

indeed the case.

Warfield begins by pointing out

that the Bible is unique among all

other books in the place it maintains

among civilized people. Its influenceon legislation, social habits, culture,

and governmental forms is unparal-

leled. It has left its mark in the shap-

ing and even transformation of every

quarter of every society to which it

has gone. Religious rituals of sacrifice

forever embedded in the conscious-

ness of men and societies suddenly

fell into neglect when brought into

contact with the Bible. Religion and

morals, in their practice and in theirvery theory, have been revolutionized

by this unique book. Moreover, its

influence has always been beneficent.

This is not to deny the many abuses

of professing Christians, but it is an

unchallenged fact that where the Bible

has gone, society has improved, and

love has replaced hate and horror. Fol-

lowing its first arrival, by all accounts

attested to by miraculous signs, the

Bible has deluged the world, crossing

all boundaries and barriers. So perva-

sive has been its influence wherever

it has gone that it would be difficult

to overstate the case. And all this has

been accomplished without the com-

mendation of royalty, against the most

determined and violent opposition,

and by means of the efforts of a dozen

unlearned men bringing a message

considered foolish by all who heard it.

Yet all who are encountered by it are

left with the deep-rooted conviction

that this book is from God. If this isfanaticism, it is a remarkable fanati-

cism that has continued and grown in

a way that is without precedent.

And so Warfield inquires, what

might account for all this if not the

Bibles own claim that it is of divine

origin?

Warfield proceeds by observing

that it does not appear that the Bible,

if of human origin only, could have

been produced with the consciousintent of influencing the world as it

has. The Bible is in fact not one but

sixty-six books of virtually every

genre, written by at least thirty dif-

ferent writers from all walks of life,

education, and temperament, and scat-

tered over a period of 1,500 years. Yet

the Bible is not, as would be expected,

a conglomerate of unrelated literary

debris finally thrust together by some

whirlpool of time. Rather, the Bibledisplays a remarkable unity in theme,

in moral and religious ideal, in subject

matter, and in its leading figure, Jesus

Christ. Predictions and prophecy in

the first half of the book are fulfilled

so numerously and so exactly in the

second half that the two are manifestly

designed for the each other (implied:

by a single mind). The former half

manifestly anticipates and is com-

pleted by the latter, and the latter rests

entirely upon the former. Each part

contributes to the whole, and each

book adds something of orderly and

constantly progressive explanation,

definition, or completion to the others.

All of its parts very naturally dovetail

together into a single well-connected

and consistent whole. All of its partsseem clearly to be meant for the

others, intentionally framed for its pe-

culiar place. Although its production

far outlasts the life span of any single

man, the Bible seems by all accounts

to be a book designed from the begin-

ning to be what it is in its final form.

All its varied parts fit together so well

and so naturally that it appears to

have been produced by a single mind.

And yet what human mind could have

guided this process over so manyauthors and so many centuries?

Moreover, the Bible displays not

only a remarkable unity in its teach-

ing, but the teaching itself is marked

by a unique and otherwise unexplain-

able grandeur. The writers betray an

advanced knowledge beyond their his-

torical setting, an understanding of the

universe that is in perfect accord with

all that later advanced learning has

discovered. Their elevated conceptionof God, unprecedented in any other

religious teaching before or since, and

their correspondingly elevated con-

ception of the nobility of man created

in Gods image likewise cry for ex-

planation. Still further, the great truths

they present are not suited for their

own time and culture only but are

universal truths that are instinctively

recognized by all to be true, divinely

insightful, personally and universally

relevant, and of eternal bearing.

And so again Warfield inquires,

what can account for this? The

evidence simply does not allow an ac-

counting for the Bible apart from God

And if this book cannot be accounted

for apart from God, we seem shut up

to account for it as from him. m

Warfield on the

Divine Origin of the Bible

Fred G. Zaspel


10/20


Definite Atonement Long $10.95 $8.76

The Doctrine of BaptismSasser $3.50 $2.80

Full Bellies and Empty HeartsAutio $14.99 $12.00

Galatians: A Theological InterpretationWhite $15.95 $12.76

GraceReisinger $13.95 $11.16

The Grace of Our Sovereign GodReisinger $19.99 $16.00

Hermeneutical Flaws of DispensationalismGeorge $10.75 $8.60

In Defense of Jesus, the New LawgiverReisinger $23.95 $15.95

Is John G. Reisinger an Antinomian?Wells $4.25 $3.40John Bunyan on the SabbathReisinger $3.00 $2.80

Jonathan Edwards on Biblical Hermeneutics and the

Covenant of GraceGilliland$3.95 $3.16

The Law of Christ: A Theological ProposalWhite $14.95 $11.96

Limited AtonementReisinger $7.00 $5.60

Ministry of Grace Essays in Honor of John G. ReisingerSteve West, Editor $14.85 $11.88

The New Birth Reisinger $5.50 $4.40

The New Covenant and New Covenant TheologyZaspel $11.99 $9.60

New Covenant TheologyWells & Zaspel $19.95 $15.96

The Newness of the New CovenantWhite $12.99 $10.39

The New Perspective on Justification West $9.99 $8.00

The Obedience of ChristVan Court $2.50 $2.00Our Sovereign God Reisinger $4.45 $3.56

Perseverance of the Saints Reisinger $6.00 $4.80

The Priority of Jesus ChristWells $11.95 $9.56

A Prisoners ChristianityWoodrow $12.99 $10.39

Saving the Saving GospelWest $12.99 $10.39

Sinners, Jesus Will ReceivePayne $9.99 $8.00

Studies in GalatiansReisinger $19.99 $15.96

Studies in EcclesiastesReisinger $19.99 $15.96

Tablets of StoneReisinger $10.95 $8.75

The Sovereignty of God and PrayerReisinger $5.75 $4.60

The Sovereignty of God in Providence Reisinger $4.45 $3.56

Total Depravity Reisinger $5.00 $4.00Union with Christ: Last Adam and Seed of AbrahamWhite $11.95 $9.56

What is the Christian Faith? Reisinger $2.50 $2.00

What is New Covenant Theology? An IntroductionWhite *NEW* $12.99 10.39

When Should a Christian Leave a Church?Reisinger $3.75 $3.00

Total Price

See Rate Charts on Page 11 Shipping

Total

TITLE LIST SALE QTY COST

Abide in Him: A Theological Interpretation of John's First Letter White $13.95 $11.16

Abrahams Four SeedsReisinger $10.95 $8.76

The Believers SabbathReisinger $3.75 $3.00

Biblical Law and Ethics: Absolute and CovenantalLong $15.75 $12.60

But I Say Unto YouReisinger $10.95 $8.68

Chosen in EternityReisinger $5.50 $4.40

Christ, Lord and Lawgiver Over the ChurchReisinger $2.50 $2.00

The Christian and The SabbathWells $11.99 $9.59

Continuity and DiscontinuityReisinger $12.95 10.36


11/20


TITLE LIST SALE QTY COST

Warfield on the Christian LifeFred G. Zaspel *NEW* $17.99 $14.39

The Theology of B.B. WarfieldFred G. Zaspel $40.00 $29.95

Philosophical Dialgoues on the Christian FaithSteve West $12.00 $9.50

What Jesus Demands from the WorldJohn Piper $19.99 $13.25

The First London Confession of Faith-1646 Edition

Preface by Gary D. Long

$7.99 $6.50

All Things NewCarl Hoch $19.98 $15.95

Context! Evangelical Views on the Millenium ExaminedGary D. Long $25.00 $17.50

The Doctrine of ChristWilliam Sasser $4.75 $3.75

The Doctrine of SalvationWilliam Sasser $4.75 $3.75

The Doctrine of ManWilliam Sasser $4.75 $3.75

The Doctrine of GodWilliam Sasser $4.00 $3.00

The Atoning Work of Jesus ChristWilliam Sasser $5.00 $4.00

The New Covenant and the Law of ChristChris Scarborough $10.95 $9.50

Should Christians Fear God Today?John Korsgaard $6.95 $3.50

Justification by FaithJames White $6.95 $2.75Answers to Catholic ClaimsJames White $9.95 $2.00

The Fatal FlawJames White $11.95 $2.50

Gods Sovereign GraceJames White $8.95 $3.50

Behind the Watchtower CurtainDavid A. Reed $10.95 $2.00

How to Share Christ with a Jehovahs WitnessPatrick J. Campbell $5.95 $2.50

The Reformers and Their StepchildrenLeonard Verduin $9.95 $9.50

The Pilgrims Progress (The Accurate Revised Text by Barry E. Horner) $12.00 $9.75

Biblical EldershipAlexander Strauch $14.99 $9.30

Biblical Eldership Study GuideAlexander Strauch $19.99 $12.50

Biblical Eldership Mentors GuideAlexander Strauch $19.99 $12.50

Total Price

See Rate Charts Below Shipping

Canadian ordersDiscover, Visa or MasterCard onlyplease. Total Order

Postage & Handling RatesUnited States

Up to $20.00 $3.95

$20.01$50.00 $6.00

$50.01 and Up 12%

Postage & Handling RatesOverseasDiscover, VISA or

MasterCard

Please call or e-mail for rates

Postage & Handling RatesCanadaDiscover, VISA or

MasterCard

Up to $30.00 $7.50

$30.01 and Up 25%

Ship to: _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ __

Street address: ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ __

City: _______________ State: ______Zip: ____

Country: ____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ __

My check (payable to New Covenant Media) is enclosed

Charge to my: Discover VISA MasterCard

Expires __ ___ __/_____ __

Account Number: __ ____/______/______/______

Signature: ____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ___

S h i p p i n g R a t e C h a r t f o r B o o k s


12/20

Page 12 June 2012 Issue 188WhiteContinued from page 1

so that you do not see them; in fact,

you are not supposed to see where the

light is coming from; what you are

meant to see is just the building on

which the floodlights are trained. The

intended effect is to make it visible

when otherwise it would not be seenfor the darkness, and to maximize its

dignity by throwing all its details into

relief so that you can see it properly.

This perfectly illustrated the Spirits

new covenant role. He is, so to speak,

the hidden floodlight shining on the

Savior. Or think of it this way. It is as

if the Spirit stands behind us, throw-

ing light over our shoulder on to Jesus

who stands facing us. The Spirits

message to us is never, Look at me;

listen to me; come to me; get to knowme, but always, Look at him, and

see his glory; listen to him and hear

his word; go to him and have life; get

to know him and taste his gift of joy

and peace. The Spirit, we might say,

is the matchmaker, the celestial mar-

riage broker, whose role it is to bring

us and Christ together and ensure that

we stay together.1 His main ministry

is to lift up Jesus and point us to him.

In John 16:14, Jesus says, He willglorify me (NIV).

I want to unpack the Spirits

empowerment of cruciform love from

1 Thessalonians 4:8-9. Those verses

read, Therefore, anyone who re-

jects this instruction does not reject a

human being but God, the very God

who gives you his Holy Spirit. Now

about your love for one another we

do not need to write to you, for you

yourselves have been taught by Godto love each other.I want to unpack

a couple of Pauls descriptive state-

ments. Pauls main point in theses

verses and the surrounding context is

the call to holiness. What is fascinat-

ing, though, is what Paul writes sort

of in passing. He describes God as the

one who gives his Holy Spirit to us.

1 J.I. Packer,Keep in Step with the Spirit

(Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005), 57-58.

He also describes the believers as be-

ing taught by God.

Promise

Recall the story. God had created

his people Israel and called them to

obey the law. Sadly, they were disobe-

dient right from the start, and it neverreally got any better. The history of

Israel is a history of idolatry and un-

faithfulness. God wasnt finished with

them, though. Through the prophets,

God promised to remake them. He

was going to intervene and do some-

thing new. One of the major prom-

ises is of a new covenant. Jeremiah

31:31-34 says,

The days are coming, declares

the LORD, when I will make a new

covenant with the people of Israel and

with the people of Judah. 32 It will not

be like the covenant I made with their

ancestors when I took them by the

hand to lead them out of Egypt, be-

cause they broke my covenant, though

I was a husband to them, declares

the LORD. 33 This is the covenant

I will make with the people of Israel

after that time, declares the LORD.

I will put my law in their minds and

write it on their hearts. I will be their

God, and they will be my people.34

Nolonger will they teach their neighbor,

or say to one another, Know the

LORD, because they will all know me,

from the least of them to the greatest,

declares the LORD. For I will forgive

their wickedness and will remember

their sins no more.

Ezekiel also promises this new

work of God. In 11:19, we read, I

will give them an undivided heart and

put a new spirit in them; I will remove

from them their heart of stone andgive them a heart offlesh. Similarly,

in Ezekiel 36:25-27, we hear, I will

sprinkle clean water on you, and you

will be clean; I will cleanse you from

all your impurities and from all your

idols. I will give you a new heart and

put a new spirit in you; I will remove

from you your heart of stone and give

you a heart offlesh. And I will put my

Spirit in you and move you to follow

my decrees and be careful to keep my

laws. Ezekiel was probably written

about 30 years after Jeremiah, and he

is commenting here on Jeremiah 31.

He says that the interiorized law will

be the Spirit of God who transforms

believers and impels them to free

obedience.2

Fulfillment

For Paul, as well as for all learned

first century Jews, Ezekiel 36 and

Jeremiah 31 were very important pas-

sages.3 They are two key new cov-

enant passages, and Paul sees these as

having been fulfilled in the death and

resurrection of Christ and the pouring

out of the Spirit at Pentecost. Notice

that the tense of the verbgive is future

in Ezekiel 36. When Paul quotes it in

1 Thessalonians, Paul uses a present

participle. I want to point out the simi-

larities between the promises given

in Ezekiel and what Paul writes here.

Note that didonta anddsare from

the same verb didmi:4

1 Thess. 4:8 - God who gives

(didonta) his Holy Spirit (to pneuma

autou) to us (eis hymas)

Ezek. 11:19 - I will give (ds)

them an undivided heart and give

(ds) a new spirit (pneuma) in them

(en autois); I will remove from them

their heart of stone and give them a

heart offlesh.

Ezek. 36:26 - I will give (ds) you

a new heart and a new spirit (pneuma)

in you (en hymin)

Ezek. 36:27 - And I will give my

Spirit in you (to pneuma mou ds en

hymin) and move you to follow my de-

crees and be careful to keep my laws.Ezek. 37:6 - I will attach tendons

to you and makeflesh come upon you

and cover you with skin; I will give my

2 T.J. Deidun,New Covenant Morality

in Paul(Rome: Biblical Institute Press,

1981), 37.

3 Ibid., 20, 53.

4 Where these translations differ from

the NIV, they are my own.

WhiteContinued on page 14


13/20


Sound of Grace Ministries started

in 1966 under the name Sword

&Trowel. The primary goal was

teaching the Doctrines of Grace in

language that the man in the pew

could understand. Ourfive tape series

on the five points of Calvinism and

the six tape series on the Sovereigntyof God have literally gone around

the entire world. Many churches use

them as indoctrination tools and many

individual believers have used them

for Bible Studies. The one constant

comment we get about our ministry

is this: John Reisinger speaks in a

manner that makes theology easy to

understand.

Organizations are supposed to have

a Mission Statement that clearlyspells out their reason for existing.

This statement defines the contribu-

tion the organization hopes to make.

I read again recently the Book of

Nehemiah and while reading chapter

8, I thought, What a great Mission

Statement this would make forSound

of Grace. The goal ofSound of

Grace is to see Nehemiah chapter 8

duplicated in our day. Look with me

again at that wonderful passage of

Scripture.

1And all the people gathered

themselves together as one man into

the street that was before the water

gate; and they spake unto Ezra the

scribe to bring the book of the law of

Moses, which the LORD had com-

manded to Israel.

2And Ezra the priest brought the

law before the congregation both of

men and women, and all that could

hear with understanding, upon thefirst

day of the seventh month.

3And he read therein before the

street that was before the water gate

from the morning until midday, before

the men and the women, and those

that could understand; and the ears of

all the people were attentive unto the

book of the law.

5And Ezra opened the book inOur PurposeContinued o n page 16

the sight of all the people; (for he was

above all the people;) and when he

opened it, all the people stood up:

6And Ezra blessed the LORD,

the great God. And all the people

answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting

up their hands: and they bowed their

heads, and worshipped the LORD with

their faces to the ground.

7 Also Jeshua, and Bani, and

Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai,

Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah,

Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the

Levites, caused the people to under-

stand the law: and the people stood intheir place.

8 So they read in the book in the

law of God distinctly, and gave the

sense, and caused them to understand

the reading.

9And Nehemiah, which is the Tir-

shatha, and Ezra the priest the scribe,

and the Levites that taught the people,

said unto all the people, This day is

holy unto the LORD your God; mourn

not, nor weep. For all the people wept,

when they heard the words of the law.

10 Then he said unto them, Go

your way, eat the fat, and drink the

sweet, and send portions unto them for

whom nothing is prepared: for this day

is holy unto our LORD: neither be ye

sorry; for the joy of the LORD is your

strength.

11 So the Levites stilled all the

people, saying, Hold your peace, for

the day is holy; neither be ye grieved.

12And all the people went theirway to eat, and to drink, and to send

portions, and to make great mirth,

because they had understood the

words that were declared unto them.

13And on the second day were

gathered together the chief of thefathers of all the people, the priests,

and the Levites, unto Ezra the scribe,

even to understand the words of the

law. Nehemiah 8:1-13.

Zerubbable led a group of people

out of captivity to return to Jerusalem.

The city was in ruins. The temple,

walls and gates were destroyed.

Eighty years later Ezra returned with

another group of people and laid the

foundation for the temple. Fourteen

years after that Nehemiah led a group

back to Jerusalem and under hisleadership the walls and gates were re-

stored. Nehemiah 8 records the revival

that took place when the Word of God

was preached and understood at the

dedication service.

First, we should notice what Ne-

hemiah did and what he did not do.

Nehemiah was not a priest, a prophet,

or a Scribe. He was what is called a

layman (not a good word.) He was

a gifted organizer and administratorbut he was not a preacher or teacher.

Nehemiah took charge of rebuilding

the walls but when the restoration was

finished and it came time to open the

Scriptures and dedicate the work that

had been done, Nehemiah called for

Ezra the Scribe. Blessed is the congre-

gation where godly business men and

women, as well as pastors and teach-

ers, know their respective roles. Great

preachers may be poor organizers and

some laypeople who cannot teach orpreach may be great organizers and

administrators. Some of the greatest

Bible expositors I have known were

some of the poorest administrators and

some of the most gifted administrators

were theologically illiterate. Being a

successful businessman does not in

itself qualify you to be a church leader

any more than being a Bible scholar

makes you a capable church leader.

We need both Ezras and Nehemiahsand they must both submit to each

other in their respective functions. Let

the Nehemiahs effectively take care

of the secular aspects of the minis-

try of the Church but let them yield

to the pastors and teachers when it

comes times to hear the Word of God

expounded. Let the Ezras expound

the Scriptures but dont allow them to

Our Purpose

John G. Reisinger


14/20


WhiteContinued from page 12

Spirit to you (ds pneuma mou eis

hymas), and you will come to life.

Ezek. 37:14 - I will give my Spirit

to you (ds to pneuma mou eis hy-

mas) and you will live.5

Now notice the similarities be-

tween 1 Thessalonians 4:9 and Jeremi-

ah 31 and Isaiah 54:

1 Thess. 4:9 Because you have

been taught by God (theodidaktoi)

Isa. 54:13 -All your children willbe taught by the LORD (didaktous

theou), and great will be their peace.

Jer. 31:34 - No longer will they

teach their neighbor, or say to one

another, Know the LORD, because

they will all know me, from the least of

them to the greatest. (38:34 LXX) (kaiou m diaxsin hekastos ton politn

autou. hoti pantes eidsousin me)6

Notice that what Jeremiah and Isa-

5 Ibid., 19, 33, 53, 228; Gordon Fee,

Gods Empowering Presence (Pea-

body, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 52.

6 David Peterson,Possessed by God,

NSBT(Downers Grove, IL: IVP,

1995), 84.

iah saw as a future has become a pres-

ent reality for the Thessalonians. They

have been taught by God.7 Taught

by God probably refers to both the

teaching of Jesus and the inner work-

ing of the Spirit.8 It is communication

from God and a relationship with him.

Cruciform Love

Now we have the Spirit of God,

who moves us to follow his decrees

and keep his laws. Our old stony heart

has been replaced by a fleshly one.

We have been taught by God. Notice

what Paul says we are taught by God

to do: mutually love. This has been an

emphasis in 1 Thessalonians (just like

it is in every New Testament letter).

Consider a sampling:

3:6 - But Timothy has just now

come to us from you and has brought

good news about your faith and love.

3:12 - May the Lord make your

love increase and overflow for each

other and for everyone else, just as

ours does for you.

7 Ibid., 33.

8 F.F. Bruce, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, WBC

(Word, 1982), 90.

5:7-8 - For those who sleep, sleep

at night, and those who get drunk, get

drunk at night. But since we belong

to the day, let us be sober, putting on

faith and love as a breastplate, and the

hope of salvation as a helmet.

5:11 - Therefore encourage one

another and build each other up, justas in fact you are doing.

5:15 - Make sure that nobody

pays back wrong for wrong, but

always strive to do what is good for

each other and for everyone else.

Love is at the heart of the new cov-

enant call to holiness. It is the Spirits

principal work. It is no wonder that

the first fruit of the Spirit listed is love

(Gal. 5:22f). Love does not come from

us. The gospel is the power that trans-

forms us, and the Spirit works in and

through us. It is Gods activity within

the hearts of Christians that impels us

to action.9 God is the one who gives

us his Holy Spirit. Gives you is a pres-

ent participle stressing the ongoing

work of the Spirit in our lives.10 m

9 Deidun,New Covenant Morality, 58.

10 Fee, Gods Empowering Presence, 52.

VISIT THE NEW SOUND OF GRACE WEBSITE

www.soundofgrace.org

For art icles, features, audio and video presentations, handouts from the

2012 John Bunyan Conference, and announcements.

Back issues ofSound of Grace and chapters from

John G. Reisinger's

and

A. Blake White's

books are available as well.

Visit frequently as new and updated material is being added.

April 2012

Hi my Brothers,

I want to say thank you for such a fine journal. May our Lord connue to bless your work.

Pastor John A


15/20


16/20


to be released fully andfinally in the

Messiahs kingdom after the Day

of the Lord (The MacArthur Study

Bible, p. 1268).

I will leave it to the reader to de-

cide whether the words this is that

really means Pentecost is the fulfill-ment of Joels kingdom prophecy or

if those words are only apreview

andsample of that kingdom. Do

we take Joel literally, and be consis-

tent with the literal hermeneutic

of Dispensationalism and symbolize

Peters interpretation of Joel, or do we

symbolize Joel and take Peters this

is that literally? It seems strange to

me that militant defenders of a literal

interpretation of Joels Old Testa-

ment kingdom prophecy are forced to

spiritualize a New Testament writers

interpretation of that same Old Testa-

ment prophecy.

I doubt my article will persuade

any Dispensationalist to change their

view. I do hope some people who act

like Dispensationalists are the only

people who really believe in verbal

(in their minds meaning literal) in-

spiration will realize that is not true.

Non-Dispensationalists, including

A-mils, are just as deeply committed

to the full verbal inspiration of the

Scriptures as the Pre-mils. Likewise,

I hope others will see that our Dis-

pensational brethren are just as com-

mitted heart and soul to Scripture as

their sole rule of life and theology as

we non-Dispensationalists are. Re-

gardless, it seems obvious to me that

Peters words, this is that, reallymeans this is that. Peter is declar-

ing the kingdom promised in Joel has

been fulfilled. The New Testament is

clearly spiritualizing an Old Testament

kingdom promise. The promised new

covenant has been established.

One last word. I want to empha-

size again my deep conviction that

the New Testament Scriptures must

interpret the Old Testament Scriptures.

We must use Hebrews and I Corinthi-ans to interpret the book of Joel. We

do not form a literal interpretation

of Joel 2:28-32, and other kingdom

passages in the Old Testament, and

force that understanding into the New

Testament. We must make Joel fit into

Hebrews; we do not fit Hebrews into

Joel. We must let the New Testament

interpret the Old Testament. When we

use this new covenant principle of in-

terpretation we will discover that this

is that means the writer is clearlyspiritualizing an Old Testament king-

dom prophecy. m


Our PurposeContinued on page 18

tell Nehemiah how to build a wall or

a gate.

Second: The Ezras must teach

the Word of God in such a way that

people understand. Verse 8 is clear

as to the goal of biblical preaching.

The goal must notbe to impress each

other in either their knowledge or

their ability. True preachers must aim

at making sure the people understand

what Gods Word means. The congre-

gation must not leave a church service

saying, My, what a great sermon,

they must leave saying, My, what a

great gospel! They must not leave

saying, Isnt he a great preacher?

They should leave saying, Dont we

have a great Savior! the Levites, caused the people

to understand the law: So they

read in the book in the law of Goddistinctly, and gave the sense, and

caused them to understand the

reading.Nehemiah 7, 8:8.

John Wesley is said to have written

out his sermons before preaching them

and giving them to a scrubwoman to

read. If there were words or thoughts

in the sermon that she did not under-

stand, Wesley would re-work it until

she could understand it. Some folks

Our PurposeContinued fr om page 13

I would like to help support the ministry ofSound of Grace:

A tax-deductible gift in the amount of __ ____ __ __ __ __ is enclosed.

I would like to receive Sound of Grace via the USPS:

A check in the amount of $20.00 for a paper copy (payable to Sound of Grace) is enclosed.

I would like to receive Sound of Grace via email:

A check in the amount of $10.00 for a pdffile (payable to Sound of Grace) is enclosed.

Please continue free of charge: Via email via USPS

PLEASE PRINT CLEARLYTHANK YOU

Name:

Street Address:

City: State/Providence: Zip/Postal:

Email address: @ Phone number:

Mail to: Sound of Grace, 5317 Wye Creek Drive, Frederick, MD 21703-6938


17/20


2012 JOHN BUNYAN CONFERENCEAUDIO CD ORDER FORM

QTY CD NO SPEAKER TITLE

JB12-A01 Steve West Revisiting Free Will-Part 1

JB12-A02 Steve West Revisiting Free Will-Part 2 (Includes Q&R)

JB12-A01 & A02 Q&R Steve West Included free when JB12-A01 and A02 are orderedJB12-A03 Blake White Christotelic Hermeneutics: Not for the Foolish and Slow

of Heart

JB12-A04 Thomas R. Schreiner New View of Justification-Part 1



JB12-A04A06 Q&R Thomas R. Schreiner Included free when JB12-A04 thru A06 are ordered.

JB12-A07 Blake White Cruciform Love-Part 1

JB12-A08 Blake White Cruciform Love-Part 2 (Includes Q&R)

JB12-A07 & A08 Q&R Blake White Included free when JB12-A07 and A08 are ordered

JB12-A09 Steve Cowden Love and Friendship in the New Covenant

John 15:12-15

JB12-A10 John G. Reisinger The Role of the Conscience in the Old and New Cov-enants (Includes Q&R)

JB12-A11 Chad Bresson Preaching the Psalms in the New Covenant-Part 1

JB12-A12 Chad Bresson Preaching the Psalms in the New Covenant-Part 2(Includes Q&R for Sessions 11 and 12)

Total Quantity X $5.00 =

JB12-MP3-A01 MP3 CD Includes JB12-A01 through A06 w/Q&R Sessions

JB12-MP3-A02 MP3 CD Includes JB12-A07 through A12 w/Q&R Sessions

Total Quantity X $15.00 =

Name:___________________________________________________________________________

Address: ________________________________________________________________________

City: __ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ State/Province: __ ___ ___ __ Zip/Postal Code ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

Phone: ________________________ Email: ____________________________________________

Credit Card No. __ __ _-____ _-_____-____ _ (Discover/VISA/MC only) Exp Date: __ __/____ CCV No: _____

Postage & Handling RatesU.S.

Up to $15.00 $3.50

$15.01$50.00 $5.00

$50.01 and Up 12%

Postage & Handling RatesCanadaCredit Card only

Up to $25.00 $5.00

$25.01 and Up 20%

Postage & Handling RatesOverseasCredit Card only

Please call or e-mail for rates

You may place an order by:

Emailing this form to [email protected]

Mailing this form to:

New Covenant Media

5317 Wye Creek Drive

Frederick, MD 21703-6938

Calling 301-473-8781


18/20


VaningerContinued from page 15

Matthew drives home this point

in his account of the Transfiguration

later on in his gospel. In the pres-

ence of Moses and Elijah, the voice

of God from heaven declares, This

is my beloved Son, with whom I am

well pleased; listen to him (Matthew17:5). A great changed has occurred.

Jesus is now the Rabbi. Jesus is now

the Teacher who speaks with abso-

lute andfinal authority. Jesus is the

Wisdom of God. We cannot do any

better than to listen to him. When we

do so, we are like a man who builds

his house on the rock. m

for an excellent discussion of how Je-

sus teaching in Matthew 5-7 set aside

the Law of Moses but did not speak ofthe law as useless or as no longer be-

ing Scripture or as being in error, but

rather always displayed the greatest

respect for OT law. Like Paul, Jesus

saw the law of Moses as good when

seen in its proper place in redemp-

tion history. But Jesus and Paul, along

with the other NT writers, saw the law

(and the OT as a whole) as prelimi-

nary and preparatory. The coming of

the Messiah and the fulfillment of the

new covenant brought about the next

and better phase of the larger plan ofredemption that God has provided.

criticized him for cheapening the

Kings English. Wesley responded,

My concern is not with the Kings

English but with being sure that

people understand the truth. I believe

some preachers stay up all night trying

to figure out how to talk for 30 min-utes without actually saying anything.

It amazes me how godly men and

women will put up with mish-mash

sermons. They will complain they are

not being fed spiritually but continue

to support, with their presence and

finances, a spiritually dead church.

I remember when I was in full time

evangelism I was often told by a visi-

tor, We dont hear preaching like this

in our church. I would reply, Thenwhy dont you attend this church?

They hear this kind of preaching every

Sunday. If you ate at a restaurant and

never had a decent meal, would you

keep going back paying good money

for poor food or would you look for

a different place to eat? The goal of

Sound of Grace is not just to preach

the Scriptures, but to preach them in

such a way that the people who hear

us will understand the truth.

Third: Notice two things that hap-

pened when the people understood the

Word of God being preached. One,

all the people wept, when they heard

the words of the law (v.9). Two, and

all the people went their way to eat,

and to drink, and to send portions,

and to make great mirth, because they

had understood the words that were

declared unto them (v.12).

The peoplefi

rst wept and then theyexperienced great joy and both the

weeping and the joy were produced by

their understanding of the Scriptures.

Their weeping was turned to joy.They

first wept in conviction of sin because

they saw how much they had neglect-

ed and disobeyed the Word of God.

One thing they immediately corrected

was the observing of the feast of

Tabernacles (see vss. 14-17). A correct

understanding of Scripture will always

all branches), Christians who were

philosophers, and indeed, Christians

who were working in every field

and every discipline. Did all of

these godly men and women have

their heads in the sand? Did all of

them have enough critical thinkingskills to earn Doctorates and receive

academic accolades from their peers,

but not enough discernment to prevent

being brainwashed by their religious

convictions?

I remember reading a small

booklet titledIs Science Irreligious?

The authors goal was to refute the

idea that true science was opposed to

orthodox Christianity. As evidence,

the author cited many obituarieslisted in scientific journals. Each

obituary included the name of the

deceased scientist, family members,

writings, special accomplishments,

and lastly, where applicable, church

affiliation. The majority of many of

these scientists obituaries said, He,

or she, was a faithful member of

such-and-such church. The author

then linked this evidence to his claim,

stating, It would seem very unlikely

that a scientific organization would

openly publish in its journal that

some of its members were guilty of

the academic sins of superstition and

anti-scientific thinking. Apparently

those scientific organizations did not

believe that being a Christian was

totally inconsistent with being a true

scientist.

If you chose to reject the box

of Scripture and put your faith

in yourself or some other humanauthority, go right ahead, but do not

claim you are thinking outside the

box. All that you have done is to

change boxes. You have traded Gods

box for a do-it-yourself box that you

have pasted together using your own

material. m

WestContinued fr om page 8

modernis