Sunday, 23 December 2012

Fisher on WSC 22


THE SHORTER CATECHISM EXPLAINED

QUESTION 22. How did Christ, being the Son of God, become man?

ANSWER: Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin.

Q. 1. Did Christ assume the person of a man?

A. No; he assumed the human nature, but not a human person, Heb. 2:16.

Q. 2. Had ever the human nature of Christ a distinct personality of its own?

A. No; it never subsisted one moment by itself, Luke i. 35.

Q. 3. What is the reason that the human nature of Christ never subsisted by itself?

A. Because it was formed and assumed at once; for the moment the soul was united to the body, both soul and body subsisted in the person of the Son of God.

Q. 4. How came the human nature to subsist in the person of the Son?

A. The whole Trinity adapted and fitted the human nature to him; but the assumption of it, into a personal subsistence with himself, was the peculiar act of the Son, Heb. 2:14, 16.

Q. 5. Since the human nature of Christ has no personality of its own, is it not more imperfect than in other men, when all other men are human persons?

A. The human nature of Christ is so far from being imperfect, by the want of a personality of its own, that it is unspeakably more perfect and excellent than in all other men, because to subsist in God, or in a divine person, is incomparably more noble and excellent than to subsist by itself.

Q. 6. In what lies the matchless and peculiar dignity of the human nature of Christ?

A. That it subsists in the second person of the Godhead, by a personal and indissoluble union.

Q. 7. What is the difference between the human nature and a human person? A. A human person subsists by itself; but the human nature subsists in a person.

Q. 8. When Christ became man, did he become another person than he was before?

A. No; there was no change in his person; for he assumed our nature with his former personality, which he had from eternity.

Q. 9. What is the reason that the assumption of the human nature made no change in the divine person of the Son?

A. Because the human nature was assumed by Christ without a human personality.

Q. 10. Whether is it more proper to say, that the human nature subsists in the divine nature, or in the divine person of Christ?

A. It is more proper to say, that it subsists in the divine person of Christ, because the natures are DISTINCT, but the person is ONE; and it was the divine nature only, as it terminates in the second person, which assumed the human nature into personal union.

Q. 11. Can we not say, consistently with truth, that the man Christ Jesus is God?

A. We assuredly may; because in this case, we speak of the person, which includes the human nature.

Q. 12. But can we say, in consistency with truth, that Christ Jesus, as man, is God?

A. No; because in this case, we speak only of the human nature, which does not include his divine person.

Q. 13. What is the human nature, or in what does it consist?

A. It consists in a true body and a reasonable soul, of which the first Adam, and every man and woman descending from him, are possessed.

Q. 14. Had our Redeemer always a true body and a reasonable soul, subsisting in his divine person?

A. No; until he came in the fullness of time, and then took to himself a true body and a reasonable soul.

Q. 15. How do you prove that he took this human nature to himself?

A. From Heb. 2:14, 16 -- "Verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham."

Q. 16. Why is Christ said to take to himself a true body?

A. To show that he had real flesh and bones, as we have, Luke 24:39; and that it was not, as some ancient heretics alleged, only the mere shape and appearance of a human body.

Q. 17. How does it appear that he had a true and real body, as other men have?

A. He is called Man, and the Son of man, Psalm 80:17; he was conceived and born, Matt. 1:20, 25; he was subject to hunger, thirst, and weariness, like other men; he was crucified, dead, buried, and rose again: none of which could be affirmed of him, if he had not had a true body.

Q. 18. Had not he a reasonable soul, as well as a true body?

A. Yes; otherwise he had wanted the principal constituent part of the human nature: accordingly, we read, that his "soul was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death," Matt. 26:38.

Q. 19. Why was not the human body created immediately out of nothing, or out of the dust of the earth, as Adam's body was?

A. Because, in that case, though he would have had a true body, yet it would not have been akin to us, bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh.

Q. 20. Did Christ bring his human nature from heaven with him?

A. No; for he was the "seed of the woman," Gen. 3:15.

Q. 21. How then is it said, 1 Cor. 15:47 -- "The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man, is the Lord from heaven?"

A. The plain meaning is, the first man had his original from the earth; but the second man, as to his divine nature, is the eternal, independent, and sovereign Lord of heaven and earth, equally with the Father; and as to his human nature, there was a more glorious concurrence of the adorable Trinity, in the formation of it, than in making of the first Adam.

Q. 22. What was the peculiar agency of each person of the adorable Trinity in this wonderful work?

A. The Father prepares a body, or human nature for him, Heb. 10:5; the Holy Ghost forms it, by his overshadowing power, out of the substance of the virgin, Luke 1:35; and the Son assumes the entire human nature to himself, Heb. 2:14, 16.

Q. 23. Why was Christ born of a virgin?

A. That the human nature might be found again in its primitive purity, and presented to God as spotless as it was at its creation, free from the contagion of original sin, which is conveyed to all Adam's posterity by natural generation.

Q. 24. Was it necessary that Christ should be conceived and born without sin?

A. It was absolutely necessary; both because the human nature was to subsist in union with the person of the Son of God, and likewise because it was to be a sacrifice for sin, and therefore behoved to be without blemish, Heb. 7:26.

Q. 25. What benefit or advantage accrues to us by the spotless holiness of the human nature of Christ?

A. The spotless holiness of his human nature is imputed to us as a part of his righteousness, 1 Cor. 1:30; and it is a sure earnest of our perfect sanctification at last, Col. 2:9, 10.

Q. 26. Was not the virgin Mary, the mother of our Lord, a sinner as well as others?

A. Yes; for she descended from Adam by ordinary generation; Christ rebuked her for going beyond her sphere, John 2:4; and she needed a Saviour as much as others; and believed in him for salvation from sin, Luke 1:47.

Q. 27. What necessarily follows upon the union of the two natures?

A. A communication of the properties of each nature to the whole person.

Q. 28. How does the scripture apply this communication of properties to his person?

A. By ascribing that to his person, which properly belongs to one of his natures.

Q. 29. How is this illustrated in scripture?

A. It is illustrated thus: though it was only the human nature that suffered, yet God is said to purchase his church with his own blood, Acts 20:28; and though it was only the human nature that ascended to heaven, yet, by reason of the personal union, God is said to go up with a shout Psalm 47:5.

Q. 30. Can an imaginary idea of Christ, as man, be any way helpful to the faith of his being God-man?

A. So far is it from being any way helpful, that it is every way hurtful; because it diverts the mind from the object of faith to an object of sense; by means of which we cannot believe any truth whatever, divine or human; all faith being founded solely and entirely upon a testimony.

Q. 31. How then is the person of Christ, God-man, to be conceived of?

A. It can be conceived of no other way, than by faith and spiritual understanding; or, by "the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him," Eph. 1:17.

Q. 32. What improvement ought we to make of Christ's incarnation?

A. To claim him as our own, in virtue of his wearing our nature, saying, "Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given," Isa. 9:6; or, which is the same thing, to follow the practice of Ruth, in lying down at the feet of our blessed Boaz, saying, "Spread thy skirt over me;" that is, take me, a poor bankrupt sinner, into a marriage relation with thee, "for thou art my near kinsman," Ruth 3:9.

James Fisher, Catechism on the Catechism, WSC Q&A 22

HT: Reformed.org

Saturday, 22 December 2012

James Fisher on WSC 21

QUESTION 21. Who is the Redeemer of God's elect?
ANSWER: The only Redeemer of God's elect, is the Lord Jesus Christ, who, being the eternal Son of God, became man, and so was, and continues to be God and man, in two distinct natures, and one person, for ever. (Westminster Shorter Catechism Q&A 21)
__________________________________________________________

Q. 1. What is the greatest wonder the world has ever beheld?

A. The incarnation of the Son of God, John 1:14; Jer. 31:22.

Q. 2. What makes this the greatest wonder?

A. Because by it two natures, infinitely distant, are united in one person; hence called "a great mystery," 1 Tim. 3:16.

Q. 3. Was this great event foretold before it came to pass?

A. Yes; God spake of it "by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began," Luke 1:70.

Q. 4. By what names did they speak of his coming?

A. By a variety of names, such as Shiloh, Gen. 49:10; Messiah, Dan. 9:25; Immanuel, Isa. 7:14; the Branch, Zech. 6:12; the Messenger of the covenant, Mal. 3:1; and several others.

Q. 5. Is he now actually come into the world?

A. Yes, long since: and "it is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world," 1 Tim. 1:15, "not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved," John 3:17.

Q. 6. How do you prove, that our Lord Jesus Christ is the true promised Messiah?

A. By this one argument: that "all things which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms," concerning the Messiah, are literally fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth, Luke 24:44.

Q. 7. How does this appear?

A. By comparing every prophecy and promise concerning him in the Old Testament, with the exact accomplishment of it in the New, Acts 3:18.

Q. 8. What silencing questions may be put to the Jews, who assert that the Messiah is not yet come in the flesh?

A. They may be asked, Where is the sceptre of civil government, which was not to depart from Judah until Shiloh came, according to Gen. 49:10? Where is the second temple, into which the Messiah was to come, and to make the glory of it greater than the glory of the former, by his personal appearance in it, according to Hag. 2:9? Where is the sacrifice and oblation now offered? has it not long since ceased, according to Dan. 9:27? And where is the family of David, out of which Christ was to spring, according to Isa. 11:1? is it not now quite extinct? They are utterly incapable of answering any of these.

Q. 9. What does the title of a Redeemer suppose with reference to the redeemed?

A. Bondage and captivity to sin, Satan, the world, death, and hell, through the breach of the first covenant; hence called lawful captives, Isa. 49:24.

Q. 10. Are all mankind, the elect of God as well as others, by nature under this bondage and captivity?

A. Yes; as is evident from Eph. 2:1-3.

Q. 11. Why is Christ called the only Redeemer of God's elect?

A. Because there was none capable of the vast undertaking but himself, Isa. 53:5.

Q. 12. How does Christ redeem the elect from their spiritual bondage and captivity?

A. By price and power; or by ransom, 1 Pet. 1:19, and conquest, Isa. 49:25.

Q. 13. What ransom or price did he lay down?

A. His own life, Matt. 20:28 -- "The Son of man came, to give his life a ransom for many."

Q. 14. How does Christ redeem by power or conquest?

A. When, by his word and Spirit, he breaks the bonds of the captives, and says "to the prisoners, Go forth; and to them that sit in darkness, Show yourselves," Isa. 49:9; and thus spoils principalities and powers, Col. 2:15.

Q. 15. Why is the Redeemer called Lord?

A. Because, as God, he "whose name alone is JEHOVAH, is most high over all the earth," Psalm 83:18; and, as Mediator, "all power in heaven and earth is given unto him," Matt. 28:18.

Q. 16. Why is he called Jesus?

A. Because he saves his people from their sins, Matt. 1:21.

Q. 17. Why is he called Christ?

A. Christ in the Greek, and Messiah in the Hebrew language, signify one and the same thing, John 1:41, to wit, the Anointed, Acts 10:38; which implies his designation to, and his being fully qualified for his mediatory office.

Q. 18. Upon what is Christ's sufficiency for the great work of our redemption founded?

A. Upon the infinite dignity of his person, as being the eternal Son of God, 1 John 5:20.

Q. 19. Is Christ the Son of God by nature, or only by office?

A. Christ is the eternal Son of God by nature; his Sonship is equally natural and necessary with the Paternity of the Father, Matt. 28:19; 2 John ver. 3.

Q. 20. What would be the danger of asserting, that Christ is called the Son of God only with respect to his mediatory office?

A. This would make his personality depend upon the divine will and good pleasure, as it is certain his mediatory office did, John 3:16; and, consequently, he would not be the self-existent God.

Q. 21. Might not the Sonship of Christ be the result of the divine will, though his personality is not?

A. No; because his Sonship is his proper personality, and therefore to make his Sonship the result of the divine will, is to overturn the personal properties of the Father and Son, and, consequently, to deny both, 1 John 2:23.

Q. 22. How do you prove, from scripture, that Christ's Sonship is distinguished from his office?

A. From John 7:29; where Christ, speaking of his Father, says, "I know him, for I am FROM him, and he hath SENT me." Where it is evident, that his being FROM the Father, as to his eternal generation, is distinguished from his being SENT by him, as to his office.

Q. 23. What did this glorious person, the eternal Son of God, become, that he might be our Redeemer?

A. He became Man, John 1:14; Gal. 4:4.

Q. 24. When he became man did he cease to be God?

A. No; but he became Immanuel, God-man, Matt. 1:23.

Q. 25. What is the import of the name Immanuel?

A. It imports, that God is in our nature; and that a God in our nature is not against us, but a God with us, and for us, to save us from the hands of all our enemies, Luke 1:71.

Q. 26. What moved God to become man, in the person of the Son?

A. Nothing but matchless and undeserved grace and love, 1 John 4:10.

Q. 27. How many natures has Christ?

A. Two: namely, the nature of God, and the nature of man, 1 Tim. 3:16.

Q. 28. Why are they called two distinct natures?

A. In opposition to the error of the Eutychians of old, who maintained, that the two natures were mixed or blended together, so as to make but one nature.

Q. 29. Why is he said to have but one person?

A. In opposition to the error of the Nestorians, who maintained, that each nature was a person; or, that he had two persons.

Q. 30. How does it appear, that the two natures of God and man are united in the person of the Son?

A. From Isa. 9:6 -- "Unto us a child is born -- and his name shall be called -- The mighty God." It neither being possible nor true, that he who is the child born, could be the mighty God, except by union of the divine and human natures in one person, Rom. 9:5; 1 Tim. 3:16.

Q. 31. Will ever the union between the two natures be dissolved?

A. By no means: for he is, and will continue to be our Kinsman, Priest, and Representative, in both natures for ever, Heb. 7:24, 25.

Q. 32. Does not each nature, notwithstanding of this union, still retain its own essential properties?

A. Yes; the divine nature is not made finite, subject to suffering or change; nor is the human nature rendered omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, as the Lutherans, contrary to scripture and reason, affirm.

Q. 33. Are not the acts and works of either of the two natures, to be ascribed to the person of Christ?

A. Yes; because all he did and suffered, or continues to do, as Mediator, must be considered as personal acts, and from thence they derive their value and efficacy, Acts 20:28.

Q. 34. Why is the union of the two natures called a hypostatical or personal union?

A. Because the human nature is united to, and subsists in the person of the Son of God, Luke 1:35.

Q. 35. What is the difference between the hypostatical union, and the union that takes place among the persons of the adorable Trinity?

A. The union that takes place among the persons of the adorable Trinity, is a union of three persons in one and the same numerical nature and essence; but the hypostatical is a union of two natures in one person.

Q. 36. What is the difference between the hypostatical union, and the union that takes place between the soul and body?

A. Death dissolves the union that is between the soul and the body; but though the soul was separated from the body of Christ, when it was in the grave, yet both soul and body were, even then, united to the person of the Son as much as ever.

Q. 37. What is the difference between the hypostatical union, and the mystical union that is between Christ and believers?

A. Both natures in the hypostatical union are still but one person; whereas, though believers are said to be in Christ, and Christ in them, yet they are not one person with him.

Q. 38. Why was it requisite that our Redeemer should be man?

A. That being our kinsman and blood relation, the right of redemption might devolve upon him; and that he might be capable of obeying and suffering in our nature, Heb. 2:14.

Q. 39. Why was it requisite that our Mediator should be God?

A. That his obedience and sufferings in our nature and room, might be of infinite value for our redemption, Acts 20:28; and that the human nature might be supported under the infinite load of divine wrath; which he had to bear for our sins, Rom. 1:4.

Q. 40. "Why was it requisite that the Mediator should be God and man in one person?"

A. "That the proper works of each nature might be accepted of God for us, and relied on by us, as the works of the whole person, Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 2:6."

Q. 41. What may we learn from the indissoluble union of the two natures in the person of Christ?

A. That this union shall be an everlasting security for the perpetuity of the union between Christ and believers: that the one shall never be dissolved more than the other; for he has said, "Because I live ye shall live also," John 14:19.


HT:Fisher on 21


Saturday, 15 December 2012

The Christian Sabbath is the First Day of the Week

Below is part of a short article by Presbyterian pastor, Dr. Richard Bacon, on why Christians gather on the Lord's Day instead of Saturday.

"Here is a very probable list of Christophanies and other gatherings for worship and prayer between the resurrection and Pentecost.

Appearance Day To Whom Scripture

1st 1 (resurrection) To 10 disciples John 20:19f

2nd 8 (7 x 1) + 1 To 11 disciples John 20:26

3rd? 15 (7 x 2) + 1 To 7 disciples John 21:1-14

4th 22 (7 x 3) + 1 To 500 disciples 1 Cor. 15:6

5th 29 (7 x 4) + 1 To all the apostles 1 Cor. 15:7

6th 36 (7 x 1) + 1 To 11 disciples Matt. 28:16

40 Ascension Acts 1:2-9

7th 43 (7 x 6) + 1 120 disciples Acts 1:14-15

8th 50 (7 x 7) + 1 Pentecost Acts 2:1ff

If these recorded appearances of Christ and other gatherings for worship did, in fact, occur on the first day of the week in every instance (as they surely did in the first two and in the eighth), then we have a very strong recurring apostolic example, as well as Christological example of the resurrected (on the first day of the week) Christ. This would go a long way toward explaining why 25 years later the disciples of Christ were still meeting on the first day of the week -- as indicated by Acts 20:6-7 and 1 Cor. 16:1-2. So much by way of approved example.

As far as good and necessary consequence, one should note that Christ entered into his glory on the first day of the week (Luke 24:1 cp. v. 26). So James thus even refers to him as the Lord of glory (Jas. 2:1). Thus, Scripture associates the Lord's glory with his resurrection and the resurrection took place on the first day of the week. The implication is clear that the Lord has a special propriety in the first day of the week as the day on which he entered into his glory.

Also, just as the seventh-day Sabbath commemorated the first creation (Exodus 20:11), so the first-day (actually I would even go so far as to call it eighth-day) Sabbath commemorates the new creation (2 Cor. 5:17 cp. Heb. 8:13).

Finally, what do we learn from 1 Cor. 16:1-4? First, the collection for the saints was part of the work of the Lord. Paul "gave order" to the churches in Galatia and to the Corinthian church to practice this collection ("gave order" is aorist tense of "diatassoo" -- make a precise arrangement or prescribe, direct, command, charge, ordain, etc.). Second, the collection was to be accumulated over a period of time by laying aside regular personal contributions bit by bit on the first day of the week. It is indisputable that Paul enjoined (commanded, prescribed) that these contributions were to be made on no other day but on the first day of the week. Note, Paul does not say to lay these contributions aside on any day of the week other than the Sabbath, but specifically denotes one day and one day only for the laying aside of these contributions -- the very day on which the Lord rose from the dead and entered into his glory and the very day on which at least many of his post-resurrection appearances were made to his gathered disciples."
HT: First Presbyterian Church of Rowlett

Monday, 10 December 2012

What is a Pure Church?



Question: What, then, do you mean by a pure church?-


By a pure church, or portion of the visible church, I mean a society whose confession of faith agrees with the doctrine of Jesus Christ and his apostles; and which is governed solely by the laws laid down in the word of God, or drawn from it by plain and necessary inference.



Question: What, then are the signs of a pure church?


The signs of a pure church are soundness of doctrine, a lawful and regular ministry, the prevalence of love among its members and towards all saints, and the due administration of gospel ordinances, including discipline.

Scripture Proofs:
 
Eph. 2:20. And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.

Acts 2:42. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking- of bread, and in prayers.

Acts 14: 38. And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.

Matt. 28:19. Go ye, therefore,and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. See also Acts 20 : 7.

(Excerpted from Ecclesiastical Catechism by Dr. Thomas Smyth,1843,  pp.15-16.)