Skip to main content

"Is there any word from the Lord?" (Jeremiah 37:17).

There are different ways of asking questions.
"Is there any word from the Lord?" This is a question which invites Jeremiah to speak the Word of the Lord.
In Genesis 3:1, we have a very different way of asking questions - "the serpent ... said to the woman, Did God really say ... ?"
The "ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan" (Revelation 12:9) is always trying to get us to stop believing the Word of God.
"Is there any Word from the Lord?" - Jeremiah's answer is "Yes" (Jeremiah 37:17).
What was the Word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah at that time? - "You will be delivered into the hands of the king of Babylon" (Jeremiah 37:17).
What are we to do when God's Word doesn't say what we had been hoping to hear? - We must refuse to ask the Satanic question, "Did God really say?" We must learn to say, from the heart, "This is the Word of the Lord."
It's not our place to say what the Word of God should say to us and what it should not say to us. Our response must always be, "Let it be to me according to Your Word" (Luke 1:38);  "Your Word is truth" (John 17:17).
We're not to set up as those who have the right to keep on asking the Satanic question: "Did God really say?" We're to bow before the Word of the Lord, which says to us, "This was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven" (Matthew 16:17).
We must take care that we don't get drawn into the way of the foolish man who builds his life upon the shifting sands of human opinion. There is a better way than that. It's the way of the wise man who builds his life on God's revelation:  "Everyone who hears these words of Mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock" (Matthew 7:24).
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Carl Bangs, “Arminius: A Study in the Dutch Reformation”

In this post, I will draw comparisons between Arminius and Berkouwer.  * Bangs points out that the historical situation in Holland was not a simple one - Calvinism coming in, Arminius nearly ruining it and the Synod of Dort restoring it: “The earliest Dutch Reformed leaders don’t seem to be Calvinists at all. They rise out of the soil, here and there, nurtured by the old Dutch biblical piety, not seized by dogmatic insights, but steadily pressing toward a purified life of faith according to Scripture” (p. 21). This emphasis is similar to Berkouwer’s insistence that election is not a special gnosis for the theological elite. Rather, it is a confession of faith, arising from the hearts of those who have come to know the grace of God ( Divine Election (DE), p. 216).    * Bangs observes that Arminius’ theological method is “practical and through faith”: “For the Theology which belongs to this world, is practical and through faith: Theoretical Theology belongs to the o...
Post a Comment
Read more

Faith in Scripture as God's Word

Berkouwer criticizes "an incorrect conception of theology, a conception of theology, a conception which considers it possible to discuss Holy Scripture apart from a personal relationship of belief in it, as though that alone would constitute true 'objectivity'." (Holy Scripture, pp. 9-10). He holds that those who view Scripture in this way "wrongly ... see involvement and correlation as subjectivism" (Holy Scripture, p.10). Such a misguided fear of subjectivism lapses into a false objectivism with its suggestion that Christian truth can be considered without direct reference to the believer's personal involvement with that truth. Berkouwer maintains that there must be a proper understanding of the correlation between faith and its object. He emphasizes that "faith is decisively determined by the object of faith, namely God and His Word". He rejects the idea that "Scripture ... derives its authority from the believer's faith...
Post a Comment
Read more

John McLeod Campbell on the Atonement (1)

We begin with the charges brought against McLeod Campbell by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1831: “ the doctrine of universal atonement and pardon through the death of Christ, as also the doctrine that assurance is of the essence of faith and necessary for salvation are contrary to Holy Scripture and to the Confession of Faith … ” This does not provide us with the full content of the differences between McLeod Campbell and the Westminster Confession. It does provide us with a historical starting - point since it highlights the differences as they were defined by the General Assembly. To understand the full extent of the differences, we must set these charges within the broader context of McLeod Campbell’s thought. A particular doctrine cannot be understood in isolation from the whole system of theology which lies behind it. After the 1831 trial, there were further developments in McLeod Campbell’s thought. There was an increasing emphasis on the nature of the at...
Post a Comment
Read more