The Shadow Falls

I am an arrogant person.

That is what was on my mind this morning, mainly I think it was started because of a quote from Pink that I was reading earlier in the morning. He said:

"'Hast laid the foundation of the earth.'
We have been deeply impressed with the fact that God has some good reason for referring in His Word to 'the foundation' and 'foundations' of the earth or world more than twenty-five times. We believe it is to safeguard His people from the popular delusion of the day, namely that the earth revolves on its axis, and that the heavenly bodies are stationary, only appearing to our sight to move, as the banks and trees seem to be doing to one seated in a rowing-boat or sailing ship. This theory was first advanced (so far as the writer is aware) by Grecian heathen philosophers, echoes by Compernicus in the fifteenth century, and re-echoed today by science 'falsely so called' (see 1 Tim. 6:20) to-day. Alas, that so many of God's servants and people have accepted it. Such a conceit cannot be harmonised with 'a foundation' so often predicated of the earth; which, necessarily, implies its fixity! Nor can such a theory be squared with the repeated statements of the Holy Writ that the 'sun moves' (Joshua 10:12), etc. Thewriter is well aware that this paragraph may evoke a pitying smile from some. But this will not move him. Let God be true and every man a liar. We are content to believe what He has said. Paul was willing to be a fool for Christ's sake (1 Cor. 4:10), and we are willing to be thought a fool for the Scripture's sake." - A.W. Pink, Exposition of Hebrews, Baker, pg. 72

If you caught all of that, he is among the people who thought that everything moved around the earth and that the earth is in the center of the universe and remains motionless. I admire him wanting to remain true to the Scriptures but he is so certain that his reading of them is correct that he will consider everything else false. He has done this before with other passages and I believe that to be a bit dangerous. I guess I am in the same way as regards to Creation vs. Evolution, another "lie" of science today, but I don't see any evidence for it and it makes God's power to be less than what the Genesis account describes, that He spoken and it was so, not "eventually it was so." Hodge said:

"As the Bible is of God, it is certain that there can be no conflict between the teachings of the Scriptures and the facts of science. It is not with facts, but with theories, believers have to contend. Many such theories have, from time to time, been presented, apparently or really inconsistent with the Bible. But these theories have either proved to be false, or to harmonize with the Word of God, properly interpreted. The Church has been forced more than once to alter her interpretation of the Bible to accomodate the discoveries of science. But this has been done without doing any violence to the Scriptures or in any degree impairing their authority. Such change, however, cannot be effected without a struggle. It is impossible that our mode of understanding the Bible should not be determined by our views of the subjects of which it treats. So long as men believed that the earth was the centre of our system, the sun its satellite, and the stars its ornamentation, they of necessity understood the Bible in acordance with that hypothesis. But when it was discovered that the earth was only one of the smaller satellites of the sun, and that the stars were worlds, then faith, although at first staggered, soon grew strong enough to take it all in and rejoice to find that the Bible, and the Bible alone of all ancient books, was in full accord with these stupendous revelations of science." -Systematic Theology, Volume 1, pg 573

To which I agree. Anyway, Pink, in all of his writings, writes very authoritatively and while most of it is extremely good and convicting, yet I think that his lack of accountability with other believers did lead him down the path of arrogance to a certain extent. It is true that they had many disagreeances with so many different churches but this was partially because he was so certain that how he read the Bible was right that he had parts of many different branches and couldn't find a church he deemed to be true. So he and his wife stayed by themselves in their house every Lord's Day for many years, feeling it was better to do that than subject themselves to that which is false. But that has to be hurtful to a believer over the years! But as I pondered this, it did disturb me a bit because I see a lot of Pink in myself, when I first started reading him it was good because it got me excited and much of his topical treatments are extremely good and I would recommend them, but at the same time, he tries to go into as much detail as possible on every level and he does it so authoritatively that it can be dangerous at times. He is certain that his interpretation is correct, especially at certain points of his life I'm finding. I found when reading him that there were so many arguments that I had used myself against other people online, certain lines of logic. All too often I depend on my own reasoning skills (the majority of people on the Internet are not too hard to out-reason) instead of relying on the Holy Spirit to do the work and me just proclaiming and being there.

There is a place for authoritativeness and most Christians today are too mild in things they should be trumpeting. It is time to go back to the Puritans in that sense, but when it comes to intricate doctrines, I must let the Word form my beliefs rather than come to it trying to gather Scriptures to prove my own belief to someone else, which admittedly I have done before. I'm fool myself into thinking I'm so enthusiastic to defend the Bible when in fact it's often a desire to defend my own credibility or ego. It seemed to me that there was a bit of bitterness or "take that" feeling when Pink quoted "let every man be a liar." Which I have done too. In debates with my friend in California, or with J. Nathan, sometimes I will employ the same tactic: to gather Scriptures which I think relevant to my own case by "skim" over those which I think might lend support to his, and that is wrong. The entire Scripture must form ME, I must conform to it and let it mold me. If I give willingly I shall be like the reed, which gives in the wind, if I try to act like an oak and bend to my wishes, it shall break me. This arrogance that is in me! The pride that causes me to think that I am better than others in wisdom and knowledge. As each day goes by it seems to grow, not decrease, but my abhorrence and awareness of it has increased as well, for which I am grateful but how I would like to be completely free of it forever!

So that is by far the main thing I (with the Spirit's help) am working on to curb in my own heart. As far as books go, I finished volume 1 of Hodge's Systematic Theology last week and really enjoyed it. I'm currently working on B.B. Warfield's articles on the "Westminster Assembly and its Work" (subtly suggested to me by Mr N), Spurgeon's Sermons still, Pink's Exposition of Hebrews, "Hold Fast" a sketch of Covenant Truth and its Witnesses (which I am reading to my siblings) and "Jungle Doctor," also recommended by Mr N and which I am also reading to my siblings, I started the first chapter tonight.

This past week my father and I went out to lunch with the pastor of the Velma fellowship, which some of you may remember my father mentioning. They seem like a group of people that truly desire to serve God in a biblical fashion and see so much of the superficiality of today, yet there were a few things we wanted to talk to them about because we had heard certain things. The meeting itself went well and these were the main points that came out of it:

1. They do believe that a person who is truly saved, can fall into perdition and be eternally lost if they allow Satan to get a foothold. Now they do believe that the Holy Spirit sanctifies over the believer's life but he can let himself go essentially. Afterwards I showed my parents what the Westminster Confession said on the matter and I had a very strong urge to read volume 11 of John Owen's works, which deals with the Perserverance of the Christian.

2. They believe that a believer can be sinless (daily) in this life but only through the Holy Spirit's power. I would agree with that to an extent as well and he tried to stress that only through the Holy Spirit could this be done. I'm not sure what to think about this and I remember F.B. mentioning the same thing had come up. Because while I believe it is possible to go through a day without sinning in word, thought, or deed (only by the Holy Spirit's power) the question is, DOES that happen? I do NOT believe that we can reach a state of sinless perfection where we become so good on earth that we "cannot" sin any more. This has the potential to be a dangerous doctrine if taken too far, or it can be an encouragement. Like the Puritans, I think that daily there would be things revealed in my own heart that I'd not seen before and I would never think of myself as being in that state. To do so could evoke a) pride, or b) praise. I know in my own heart there would always be a touch of the former.

3. They believe that a Christian (and we're talking a true believer here) can, by not being on guard and watching, become demon posessed. Apparently in one service (I wasn't there, but my father told me) the pastor addressed Satan directly and said something like "get out of here Satan, you have no power over us." Though please don't quote me on that. The essential thing is that he addressed Satan in his prayer and rebuked him. Which as I recall, even Michael wouldn't do. He said that if we are told to guard against Satan that this must mean he can have some hold on us. I would think however that to say that there can be the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and then the indwelling of an evil spirit is blasphemy! Isn't that somewhat of the point of the parable about the house that is filled with evil spirits in Matt. 12:43-45? It was when the house was empty and swept (outward reform) that the spirits came back, not filled with the Spirit and the fruits of grace. I know Spurgeon would say that. *grin*

In a way it was discouraging but at the same time, I think that they probably are more willing to listen to Scripture and to a Christian Brother than someone in the Baptist church, so it's kind of like being stuck between a stone and a hard place. Go to the Baptist church and endure? Try to help the people there to reform? The people run it so if the pastor did start preaching about TULIP and things like that, I'm sure he'd be kicked out pretty fast (that's what happened to the pastor at the Velma fellowship, he was discharged after he started reading and studying more), or do you go to the Velman fellowship, and sit under teaching that is definitely erroneous, preaching that is not very well-thought out (or so it seems, he does have a full-time job besides pastoring and his family)?

There was another option, my mom looked for Reformed Baptist Churches in the area and found one (I had previously looked for Reformed churches nearby but didn't see any). We did go there this past Sunday. I thought the service was done fairly orderly and the sermon was good and stronger than any of the other Baptist pastors around here, but they have strong Southern Baptist ties and it did show. There was the time during the service where everybody just goes around saying "hello" (I never understood why they did that in the middle of the singing). It just doesn't seem to really prepare the heart for worshipping GOD, who should be our focus at the time. The singing was mixed between praise songs and hymns (I missed the Psalms very much at that time). We spoke with the pastor afterward and he asked me what I do in my spare time, I said that I have been reading theology and he said "Oh! I'll have to talk to you some time then, I like that too." I couldn't tell if he was joking or not but he didn't seem to be. I would think a pastor would enjoy theology though! He also asked where I had been going to church while at school and I excitedly told him that I was a member of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America and had been going to the congregation there in Stillwater, the only one of that denomination in the state. He said something along the lines of "Reformed Presbyterian? Huh. Yeah, unfortunately sometimes all you can find is a Presbyterian church." I know he wasn't joking and I was a bit taken aback. Perhaps he misunderstood my previous statements and thought I was complaining that it was the only church in town?

As for me, I have to admit that I was rather homesick for my own church family and was missing it sorely. You don't really realize how much you truly love something until you have to leave it, and I didn't know how much I really appreciated the church until I went to another one and things were just more shallow. I have been thoroughly spoiled and I don't know how I'll survive anywhere else!

That may be the best choice for my family though. There was no altar call I should mention (the pastor told us that he does use it occassionaly but doesn't like to associate a physical action with something that takes place in the heart. They are having a revival soon. I still have Murray's book entrenched in my mind and I'm leery of "planned" revivals, I don't know what they mean by the term though, perhaps a "refreshing" time, they are having two preachers come in and times of prayer, which sounds good. Should that not be the state the church is always in though? And then God gives the increase by the pouring out of His Spirit.

Well, this is a long, rambling post. Lots on the mind, not much time to share it (Do I hear a sigh of relief?). I miss you all in Stillwater! I was glad to get the prayer list. I felt disconnected not being there, yet imagining it.
Oh, work? We installed Cabinets today.