I am not sure that I will be posting the sermon from last night. I might in the future whenever I am able to work out a few of the kinks. To be honest after I went home I felt really sour about the sermon. I was afraid that I communicated the wrong thing. My hope in asking, "Does God have enemies" was to cause us to think about what it was like when we were God's enemy or for those who do not know Him to realize they are in a dangerous spot. I hope that was conveyed and perhaps it was--but I went home thinking I could have communicated that truth more effectively. I understand that one of the things that I said might be confusing but I still stick beside it. I really do believe that the Word of God reveals that God not only hates sin (as an outward expression) but also the sinner (an inward condition), but on top of this we can also say at the same time that God loves the sinner. I do not understand all of the complexities of God.
If you are curious as to my stance here are a few other places you can look:

Does God Hate Anyone?--CARM
Does God Love the Sinner and Hate the Sin?--John H. Gerstner (Excellent)
If you are absolutely distraught on this I would suggest buying and reading D.A. Carson's excellent work: The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God

Another one of the reasons I felt uneasy has to deal with a website I visited the day before preaching this sermon. I stumbled upon the site of Westboro Baptist Church of whom maybe you have heard about on the news. These are the "Christians" who picket funerals and hold up signs such as "God hates fags" and "Thank God for (insert present disaster here)". The site made me weep because they are proclaiming a half truth. They too believe that God hates the sinner...but where they falter is that they hate the sinner. Not realizing that they are incapable of the righteous and holy anger of God. They are ungentle and unloving and feel that they are being biblical in doing so. Therefore, I had a fear that what I was preaching could potentially convey that. We should take the path that Jesus Christ took and love our enemies. We should love sinners. John Piper wrote an excellent article that I think you should view: Do I Not Hate Those who Hate You?

Also there has been a request for the full text of Jonathan Edwards' sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, just click on the link and you will find it.

Today we will be looking at p25-27 and the 5 reasons Charnock gives for why it is useful to know that God exist. Thus section is under the heading "Every atheist is a grand fool". Charnock's main thesis statement under this section is that, "If he were not a fool, he would not imagine a thing so contrary to the stream of the universal reason of the world, contrary to the rational dictates of his own soul, and contrary to the testimony of every creature, and link in the chain of creation: If he were not a fool, he would not strip himself of humanity, and degrade himself lower than the most despicable brute". What Charnock is saying is that you would have to be a complete fool to ignore what every thing around you is crying out--There is a God! The question I ask myself, though, is why am I such a fool. If Charnock is right, and I believe he is, then I too have "atheistical bubblings" within my own soul. Why am I so foolish in these moments, and how can I combat them?

If it is so obvious that God exist then why do we need to spend such time going about proving his existence? Charnock gives 5 reasons why this discipline is necessary.

1. Does not the growth of atheism prove that it is necessary? Charnock speaks of his age in the 17th century of growing in atheism--how much more is this true of our age? Our age is the fruit of Charnock's Age of the Enlightenment. The growing number of atheist in his day has greatly influenced the vast amount of bold atheist in ours. It is also interesting to note what Charnock does about the difference in the ministry of Paul and in ours today. "The apostles spent little time urging this truth [that God exist]; it was taken for granted all over the world, and they were generally devout in the worship of those idols they thought to be gods: that age run from one God to many, and our age is running from one God to none at all".
2. The existence of God is the foundation of all religion. When Charnock is speaking of religion he does not mean it as we do today. Today we think of the Buddhist religion, the Christian religion, the Muslim religion, etc. Religion is almost a dirty word in Christian circles today. We say, "we are not a religion we are a faith". Charnock's word "religion" would probably be similar to our word "piety". To a Puritan religion was synonymous with the devout fulfillment of religious obligations or reverence for God. This is why Charnock says, "We cannot pay God a due and regular homage [religion], unless we understand him in his perfections, what he is; and we can pay him no homage at all, unless we believe that he is." He is simply saying it is fundamental for us to know God's attributes and know God in his essence so that he can properly worshipped. However, if we do not know God at all, if he is unknown in his existence, then we cannot worship Him at all.
3. If our belief is resting on no more than our parents, teachers, or acquaintances then it cannot rightfully be said to be our own. "It is as much as to say there is no God, when we know not why we believe there is". This is a strong statement, but what I think Charnock is saying is that if we have no passion to know why we believe and a desire to dig deep then can we rightfully say that we even know Him?
4. It is also necessary to study the existence of God so as to lower the force of that secret atheism that bubbles up inside of us. Because of our residing sin and our desire for wickedness we secretly desire that atheism be true. Charnock's argument is that if we continuously keep in mind that God exist (and further know who this God is that exist) then it will serve a great purpose in keeping our secret atheistic tendencies in check. Furthermore he is using this as an argument for the unregenerate man as well. If he can come to see that God exists then it will keep him in check as far as his ungodly living and might actually serve to draw him to God.
5. Even when we are believing and loving God it is also important for us to study this because it is good for our own soul (it draws us away from sin and to God). It is also encouraging for us to see every creature in light of God. Charnock's point, I believe, is that the more we see God in creation and in the delight that others have for God then the more that we ourselves will delight in God.

Next time we will look at the folly of atheism as evident by the light of reason. For today ask yourself whether or not you have a passion to know God deeply. Also, think about how encouraging it is to see others have a delight in God. Does your delight in God cause others to want to know Him more, or less?

I recently received a book entitled The Existence and Attributes of God. It is a long book (1100+ pages). The author of the book is a 17th Century Puritan by the name of Stephen Charnock. You can actually order it online from the Christian Book Distributors for only 12.99. It is an excellent book and one that we will be going through on our blog. You do not have to buy it or read it--although that would be beneficial.

Today we will be looking at Discourse I--The Existence of God (from page 23-25):

"The fool hat said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." Psalm 14:1

Charnock notes that Pslam 14:1 is not speaking of the Gentile only but, as St. Paul helps us see, to the Jew as well. For "all are under sin". Charnock then begins to expound upon this text by noting that "the fool" is referring to the wicked man--"one dead in sin, yet one not so much void of rational faculties as of grace in those faculties, not one that wants [=lacks] reason, but abuses his reason." Here Charnock is standing with the apostle Paul in saying that it is not that the "fool" is actually an idiot (lacks reason) but he is a "fool" because he abuses his reason.

Charnock further points out that it is in the fools heart where his atheism is made manifest. It is not as if he has put together an elaborate scheme and has went to great lengths to develop a sophisticated argument to disprove God. Rather he "tampered with his own heart to bring it to that persuasion, and smothered in himself those notices of a Diety; which is so plain against the light of nature, that such a man may well be called a fool for it". In other words it is so obvious that there is a God and it must be supressed so violently that one would be said a fool to deny it. One would think of a foolish person that would argue while staring at the color blue that it is in fact the color green.

We further see that it is not Jehovah God which is denied but is instead Eloahia [Elohim] which name signifies the providence of God. It is then, "not that he denies the existence of a Supreme Being, that created the world, but his regarding the creatures, his government, and consequently his reward of the righteous or punishments of the wicked." Charnock then helps us to see that there are three types of atheist. The absolute atheist, the atheist which denies God's providence [probably considered agnostic in our day], and the atheist in regard to one or more of the other perfections due his nature [the "open" theologians in our day who in some form deny his omniscience]. Charnock then says that the type of atheist spoken of here in Psalm 14 is more the type of Atheist that denies the providence of God. But, Charnock notes, to deny God's Providence is "to in effect deny the being of God".

But lest we become prideful and think that we ourselves are not fools because we believe in the existence of God, Charnock points us to the truth that "the fool" is in the singular but the plurality of the evil practices displays that their is a "secret atheism" in us all. "No man is exempted from some spice of atheism by the depravition of his nature...though there are indelible convictions of the being of a God, that they cannot absoultely deny it; yet there are some atheistical bubblings in the hearts of men, which evidence themselves in their actions". What it appears Charnock is saying here is that by our actions we deny God. This text then shows us how fully man is corrupt--in our mind and in our other faculties as a result.

In the coming weeks Charnock is going to display for us that God does indeed exist and the folly in thinking otherwise. He will also give us advice for battling these "atheistical bubblings" in our hearts. It would be advisable to check back frequently to see our discussion on Charnock. As we do this let me give you one tip: It can sometimes be difficult reading the writings of the Puritans--they had a different writing style and sometimes even the language was different. Therefore, it would be advisable to slowly go over the sentences in bold (those by Charnock) read my explanation and then go back and re-read the bold words to see if you can see how the explanation corresponds to what Charnock is saying. And, as alwasy feel free to comment and e-mail any questions.

I just realized it has been an entire week since I have written anything! Sorry. I guess if I expect people to visit then I need to update more. Last night we spoke on the Prophet Zephaniah and talked about God dancing over us because of what He has done in our lives through His Son. To be honest with you I do not think I feel the full weight of this message--I feel as if I did an insufficient job of presenting the message of Zephaniah. However, I trust in the fact that the Lord is sovereign and that He uses His word to accomplish His set purposes. With that being said here is the link to the sermon, The Dancing Surgeon.