breakers of the Second Commandment exposed — Jeremiah Burroughs

“But you will say, “God forbid! What, hate God?” See that in Scripture, where the apostle reckons up the evil of those who were in their natural condition, he says that “they were haters of God” (Romans 1:30). And what the apostle there says of them, he intend of all; for it is his scope in that place to show our natural condition, and that therefore we cannot be justified by any works of our own, but it must be by faith in Christ, because we are by nature haters of God. And in the Second Commandment you have that sin exposed even of those who seem to be the greatest lovers of God, who would be thought to love God more than any people, who devise pictures to worship God by, and bestow much cost upon them. They say, “It is for the honor of God.” Who would not think that these men loved God exceedingly? Yet, though these men may be thought to be lovers of God, there is no commandment in which the breakers of it are said to be haters of God but in this commandment: “He will visit iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Him (Exodus 20:5). That is upon those who, however they pretend to love Him in their false worship, yet they hate Him.”

— Jeremiah Burroughs, Gospel Reconciliation

why the Lord has brought you where you are ― C. H. Spurgeon

“Thus you are brought to the kingdom; but why is it so? I want you to consider why the Lord has brought you where you are. Do you think that he has done it for your own sake? Does he intend all this merely that you may practise self-indulgence? Can this be the design of God? Do not think so. Has he done all this merely to give you pleasure? Not so: God’s work is like a net of many meshes, and these are all connected with each other. We are links of the same chain, and cannot move without moving others. We are members of one body, and God acts towards us with that fact in view. He does not bless the hand for the hand’s sake, but for the sake of the whole body. Well then, dear friend, you are saved that you may save; you are taught that you may teach; you are confirmed in the faith that you may confirm others; talents are allotted to you that you may turn them over and bring in heavenly usury for your Lord. Whatever you have is yours not to hoard for yourself, or to spend upon yourself, but that you may use it as a good steward of God. Who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom which God has given thee for such a time as this, when there is need of thee and all that thou hast?

Consider, next, at what a time it is that you have been thus advanced. You have been instructed in the faith in a time when unbelief is rampant. What for? You have been confirmed in full assurance at a time when many are weak and trembling. What for? You have been entrusted with talent in a time when multitudes are perishing for lack of knowledge. What for? You are found in the church when valued brethren are dying or moving off. Why is this? You have wealth when many are starving. Why is this? You hold a high position when many master spirits are leading men into infidelity, or ritualism, or communism. Why are you placed where you are? Brother, your inevitable answer must be that God has put you where you are for some good purpose, which purpose must be connected with his own glory, and with the extension of his kingdom in the world. If, however, you think it enough to have secured a fortune, let me ask you—Do you think you are the proprietor of what you have amassed; or do you admit that you are a steward? If you are a steward, use not the goods entrusted to you for your own ends, but for your Master; for if you do not, you are a thief. Whenever a steward considers that the estate is his own property, and not his master’s, he is a thief, and before long his master will deal with him and say, “Give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.”

― C. H. Spurgeon (1884). The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Sermons, Vol. XXX (235–236). London: Passmore & Alabaster.

At the heart of every relationship is law — Timothy Keller

"At the heart of every relationship is law, and, at the same time, the purpose of law, really, in God is relationship. Let me give you an illustration to show you what I mean. It’s going to be a little funny. I hope it makes it obvious, though. Let’s just say a man and a woman are dating, and they’re getting serious. They’re thinking about each other, thinking about marriage, so one night they sit down and say, “Let’s really find out what our passions are and what’s really important to us.”

So she begins to pour her heart out, let’s say. She says, “Let me tell you three things that are very important to me. Some of them seem trivial, but, first of all, I can’t stand cigarette smoke. My nose, my eyes … I just can’t be in the same room. I’m just in a lot of trouble with it. I just can’t stand it. I can’t even be around it. You need to know that.”

He says, “Okay. Well, I’m going to smoke. I’m going to smoke three packs a day. I’m going to smoke all the time. I’m going to smoke in bed. I’m going to smoke when we eat. I’m going to smoke. I’m glad you told me about that, but I’m going to smoke.” She says, “Well let me tell you something else.” She says, “I feel very, very strongly … You make a lot of money and I make a lot of money, and together we’re going to make a lot of money, but here’s what I believe.

I feel very strongly that we should set our living expenses significantly below those which we could afford, and I would like to be deliberately and creatively and intentionally and significantly generous with our money. I would like to be very intentional in finding causes and charities and things we can be involved with and we can give our money to in significant proportions. It’s very important that we do that.” He listens, and he says, “Well, no. What I want to do is I would like to buy three or four homes and condos in luxurious places, and I will go into debt if necessary in order to afford that.”

She says, “Let me tell you one more thing. I would like to live in an interracial neighborhood. I believe in cross-cultural relationships. I think that’s very, very important.” He says, “Oh, no. For goodness’ sake. You can’t trust those people. I would have to lock all my doors. Oh no, no. We’re not going to do that at all.”

Then he says, “I’m so glad we had this little talk. This is wonderful. Now let’s get down to business. Honey, will you marry me?” She would go, “No.” Now, what is she doing? At the heart of every relationship is law. What is the law? Well, if you’re in love and you want to have a loving relationship, you can’t live any old way you want to. You have to get to know the passions and the convictions of the person you love, and the only way for you to possibly have that love relationship is to honor that. You can’t just live any old way. You can’t just trample on, in a sense, the laws of love, the passions of the heart.
In the Old Testament whenever there’s a relationship between a man and a woman in marriage, between God and a human being, between kings, between peoples, it’s always covenantal. They say, “We can have a relationship, but we won’t have a relationship unless there are some rules, unless there are some commonalities. We honor that, and if we honor it … blessing, love, embrace. If we do not … curse, which is always to be cut off. ‘Sorry, we can’t have a relationship.’ ”

There are people who love without any covenantal structure at all. We call them codependent people. That’s what we used to call them. Now we call them “people without boundaries.” I don’t know what you call them now. What it means is I enter into a relationship, and I don’t care whether you trample on everything. I don’t care if you smoke. I don’t care if you trample on my values. I don’t care what you do to me. I still love you. I’ll still be in a relationship. I’ll just let you walk all over me.

See, no covenantal structure, nothing you hold the other person to, no real blessing, by the way. There’s no real intimacy in that kind of relationship. And of course, no curse. You never cut them off. Now, here’s the difference. When you enter into a relationship with a man or a woman to get married and there has to be a cutting off because the other person will not honor, like in that funny illustration, that’s painful.

Here’s the problem. God is different than any other person. This tells us your relationship with God is not optional. I don’t have to marry you, I don’t have to be your friend, but I do have to have a relationship with God. I was built for that. That’s the reason it says in verse 12, “The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, ‘The man who does these things [the law] will live by them.’ ” What that means is unless you’re willing to hear the law of God and commit to that, unless you’re willing to obey that, you’re cursed. It’s like any other relationship.

God says, “I am holy.” God says, “Do not lie. Do not steal. Do not be selfish.” The Golden Rule. He tells you these things, and if you don’t do that, there has to be a curse. God is not codependent, like so many of us are. Here’s the problem. Without God we die. We die forever. We cannot live unless we fulfill the covenant. We cannot live if we’re cut off from him. We cannot live. We have to have him. But Paul says we don’t. We’re under a curse. That’s why something has to be done. That’s why we need the cross, but what actually happened?"

— Timothy Keller, Self-Substitution of God

The Gospel is an argument, a statement of a reasoned case — Martyn Lloyd-Jones

"All I am doing now is introducing his [Stephen's] message to you, and here is the introduction: “Men, brethren, and fathers" (Acts 7:2). What then? Here is the first word: “Hearken” (Acts 7:2). Hear! Listen! That is how Stephen began, and that is how any preaching of the Gospel must begin.
We must start by listening patiently. “Lend me your ears! I have something to put before you that will not be easy. Listen! Listen for all you are worth. Listen for your very life.”

What may we deduce from this word “hearken”? It shows us that the Gospel is an argument, a statement of a reasoned case. Stephen is on trial. He is addressing his judges, and he presents his case. Read it; study it; read it many times over. Watch the procession of the argument; watch the buildup of the facts of the case; watch the logic in it all.

Now this is Christianity. It is a matter of reason; it is an argumentation. I emphasize this because so many people today fondly imagine that they reject Christianity because they are reasonable people who are not interested in “sob stuff” or emotionalism. “Christianity?” they say. “That’s all right for women and children, all right perhaps for people in the backwoods, but not for ‘modern man’—modern man come of age, with reason, understanding, sophistication and scientific knowledge. Oh,” they say, “I shall not allow you to play on my feelings. I know your Christianity, ‘the opium of the people,’ the drug, the sheer emotionalism.”

Now I want to be quite fair and honest—Christianity has often been misrepresented in that way. But that is not Christianity. If you want to know what Christianity is, you must go back to this book of the Acts of the Apostles. Here, in this first extended report of a sermon delivered under the auspices of the Christian church, is my notion of evangelism. I do not care what anybody else is doing—this is New Testament evangelism. Stephen’s sermon is typical of all the other speeches and sermons in Acts and in the great periods of reformation and revival in the church. It is not emotionalism. It demands the use and exercise of all our best faculties. It demands our concentration and our full attention.

And these people who dismiss and reject Christianity, and the preaching of Christianity, as unintelligent and emotional “sob stuff” that plays on the feelings—what do they themselves do? They probably sit at home looking at their television sets. What do they get there? Lurid drama perhaps, or a western or some “sob stuff” in connection with a love affair. Is that reason? Is that understanding?

Now let me issue a challenge as I start an exposition of this great sermon: Have I been playing on your feelings? Have I just been entertaining you by telling you stories? Let us be honest: Do you find it an intellectual exercise to look at the television or to listen to the radio or to read your newspaper or a novel? Of course not! Some of you may be complaining that I am putting too great a strain on your intellect. All right. That I am prepared to accept. But it proves my case that this message is something that comes to us and says, “Hearken! Listen! Pull yourself together!” You cannot follow it if you are lounging back in a comfortable chair; you have to sit up. Here is a reasoned case. It is not easy; it is not simple. It demands all your energies and faculties. You need every ounce of intellect you have.

Why? Because this is truth! This is a body of truth, a body of doctrine, a body of great statements of truth—and truth is addressed to the mind. The Bible teaches that man’s greatest gift, in a sense, is his mind. Human beings have minds in a way that no animal has. They are able to follow an argument; they are able to reason; they are able to look at themselves and examine themselves.

So Stephen looked at this great body of men whom he was addressing. He saw their passion; he saw their prejudice; he saw their violence; and he saw that they were too emotional. So very politely he addressed them—“Men, brethren, and fathers” (Acts 7:2). There was no need to insult anybody: “honour to whom honour” is due (Rom. 13:7). He was a gentleman, and he presented his case.

But Stephen did venture to say this word “hearken” at the very beginning. He said in essence, “Please try to control yourselves. Try to control your passion. Listen up.”

— Martyn Lloyd-Jones (2004). Vol. 4: Glorious Christianity (1st U.S. ed.). Studies in the Book of Acts (16–18). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.