Who is worship for, anyway?  The common answer to that question from evangelicals, and even from many of the Reformed, is “Worship is for God, of course!”

Closely related to this view of worship is the oft-stated assertion that “We don’t come to worship for what we can get out of it; instead, we come to give to God our ‘sacrifice of praise’!”

In other words, worship isn’t designed to benefit man, but to benefit God.  As I’ve heard it said in various ways, “We don’t come to church for what we can get out of it; instead we come to church to give God our worship.”  The “service” in “worship service” is man serving God, not God serving man.

Such a view of worship, as common and pious-sounding as it may be, is utterly unbiblical, and even (when taken to its logical extreme) contrary to a Reformed understanding of worship.

Before I explain what I mean and make my case, let me make a few clarifications, lest the reader misunderstand me.

First of all, let the reader understand that I do indeed recognize and confess, along with our Shorter Catechism, that “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy  him forever.”  As the Scriptures teach, we were created and exist for God’s glory.  God is not a cosmic bellhop who exists to cater to our every wish and whim.  Rather, we exist for His good pleasure.

Let the reader also understand that I wholeheartedly affirm that we believers ought to approach worship with the desire and intention to glorify God in our worship, and with an attitude of reverence and awe.  Our goal in worship ought to be to see Christ magnified and God glorified in the assembly of His saints.  In this sense worship must indeed be God-centered, not man-centered.

At the same time, my basic point in this article is this:  God is most glorified when His people are most edified.

In other words, worship is ultimately designed for man’s benefit, not God’s.  In biblical, God-centered, Reformed worship, the direction and flow of worship is from God to man, not (as is common in evangelical worship)  from man to God.  In worship our Triune, covenant God graciously takes the initiative and condescends to serve, feed and edify His covenant people through His means of grace (the primary means being the Word and the sacraments) and by His Spirit, and His people respond to this Divine initiative with their prayers and praises and offerings.  All of this magnifies God’s glorious grace, and thus glorifies God.

“But is this view of worship biblical?”

You bet it is!

First of all, the true and living God, the God revealed in the Bible, is perfectly self-sufficient in and of Himself.  He is the great I AM, the Ever Blessed God who is perfectly self-sufficient and perfectly content within His own Triune Being.  He is already infinitely and unchangeably glorious in and of Himself, which means that He stands in need of nothing from His creatures, including their worship.  When we speak about “glorifying God” in our worship, this does not mean that we somehow add to God’s glory through our worship, for God is already infinitely glorious, and you cannot “add” to infinite, boundless glory!  While God is pleased to accept the heart-felt worship of His people, He doesn’t “need” our worship.  Our worship is not designed to somehow give God an “ego-boost” – as if the Creator of the universe had a low self-esteem and needed our affirmation in worship to feel good about Himself.  Rather, our worship “glorifies” God in the sense that it declares, manifests and publicly displays His glory through those elements of worship which He has prescribed for His holy worship.  (And as God’s glory is declared, manifested and displayed in worship, God’s people are edified in their faith!)

In the Bible-based words of the Westminster Confession of Faith, found at the beginning of chapter 2, section 2:  “God hath all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of himself; and is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them.” (Emphasis added.)

In other words, while God delights in the worship of His people, He does not “need” our worship.  Therefore, our worship is not ultimately for His benefit, but for ours.

Another biblical evidence for the view of worship that I am presenting here is found in the biblical emphasis on worship being for the believer’s edification and for the building up of their faith.  For example, in responding to the liturgical chaos and “charismania” exhibited in the Corinthian Church, the Apostle Paul urged the Corinthian believers to strive toward a more orderly worship practice (“But all things should be done decently and in order” – 1 Cor. 14:40, ESV).  Why?  So that the church might be built up and edified!  “Let all things be done for building up.” (First Corinthians 14:26, ESV)  Clearly, God’s primary goal in commanding His people to worship Him is that they might be edified and built up in Christ!  Again, God is most glorified when His people are most edified.

In holy worship our covenant God comes to us to commune with us and to feed our souls in Word and sacrament, and we respond with gratitude to His gracious initiative with our prayers, our praises, and our financial gifts.  This “dialogical principle” with its interplay of Divine initiative and human response is reflected in the “flow” of historic Reformed liturgical practice, such as we practice at Lake OPC.

For example, in our worship service God comes to us in grace and blessing through the apostolic salutation, and He calls us into His presence through the call to worship.  We respond with an opening hymn and a prayer of praise.  We then reaffirm our trust in the Lord through the recitation of one of the historic creeds of the church (usually the Nicene or Apostles’).  God’s presence confronts us with our sin, so we confess our sins, and then we hear God’s gracious word of forgiveness in a human voice through the mouthpiece of His ordained servant, the minister, who declares our sins to be forgiven for Christ’s sake.  God then continues to build us up by His Word through the Scripture readings.  We then respond to the reading of His Word with our hymn of faith, our prayers of intercession, our offerings, and our hymn of preparation for the sermon.  God then continues to feed our souls through the proclamation of His Word, the sermon, which is the highlight and center of our service, and once again we respond with our hymn of commitment.  (On Lord’s Days when we celebrate the Lord’s Supper God seals His word of grace proclaimed with the holy supper, which is the word of grace signified and sealed.)  Finally, God sends us forth into the world with His blessing through the benediction.  Thus a reformed worship service begins with God’s word of grace and blessing, ends with His word of grace and blessing, and is saturated throughout with His Word (read and preached), all to the edification and building up of God’s people!

In Divine worship God kills our pride and self-righteousness through His Law, raises us up and forgives our sins through His Gospel, and builds us up in our most holy faith, equipping us to go forth into the world to serve Christ in our daily callings.  In other words, worship is primarily for the benefit of His people!

“But doesn’t this make worship man-centered rather than God-centered?”

Not when we understand the truth that in worship we don’t ascend to God through our prayers and praises (as an evangelical theology of glory implies), but rather God comes to us in grace through Christ (as reflected in a theology of the cross).  Not when we understand that God is most glorified when His people are most edified!

For a helpful podcast related to this subject I would encourage the interested reader to listen to a recent “Issues Etc.” radio show podcast featuring the conservative Lutheran pastor Rev. Chris Rosebrough who speaks on the topic of “The Liturgy of Pop-American Christianity”.  Pastor Rosebrough hosts a program called “Fighting for the Faith” where he addresses heresies and trends within Pentecostalism, revivalism and broader evangelicalism, and is a regular guest on the confessional Lutheran “Issues Etc.” program.  As a biblically Reformed and Presbyterian Christian I would not necessarily endorse or agree with everything that Pastor Rosebrough says, as we differ with our Lutheran brethren on some significant points of doctrine and practice.  But, nonetheless, his perspective on worship is very thought-provoking and helpful.

You can listen to the podcast here:  http://issuesetc.org/2017/05/29/1532-the-liturgy-of-pop-american-christianity-pr-chris-rosebrough-6217/

“For whom did Christ die?”  Most Christians today would answer that question by saying, “For everyone!”

In other words, most Christians today hold to a view known as “universal atonement”, which is the view that Christ’s atoning death on the cross redeemed every single individual who ever has and who ever will live, thus making eternal salvation possible for all, yet guaranteed for none.  With the exception of those holding to a consistent universalist position (which is the view that in the end all human beings without exception will be eternally saved through Christ), most Christians who believe in some version of universal atonement also believe that many of those for whom Christ died will end up lost in hell due to their impenitence and unbelief.

In other words, Christ is believed to have paid for the sins of everyone without exception, but many of those for whom Christ died will still have to pay for their own sins in hell for eternity, because they rejected Christ.  Thus, in the case of the lost, their sins end up getting paid for twice (once by Christ on the cross, and again by the impenitent sinner in hell).

But does this view not imply an injustice on the part of God, who demands payment for human sin at the hands of His Son on the cross, only to demand payment for those same sins again by the impenitent in hell?  Thus, the position of universal atonement poses problems for the perfect justice of God.

And does it not also do a dishonor to Christ by implying that He failed in His saving work, since many for whom He died fail to be saved in the end?  And if the advocate of universal atonement objects by saying, “No, Christ did not fail in the case of those who die in their sins; instead, they failed to avail themselves of Christ’s ransom!”, may we not respond by asking:  Does not this view of “universal atonement” actually limit the power and efficacy of Christ’s atoning work on the cross by making it depend for its efficacy upon man’s response of faith?  Does this view not imply that man’s “free will” decision to reject Christ is more powerful and efficacious than Christ’s redeeming work to overcome human hardness of heart, thus making man’s unbelief stronger than God’s grace?  And does not this position, if carried out to its logical extreme, end up making the efficacy of Christ’s redeeming work dependent upon the “work” of man’s response of faith, thus making human salvation partially dependent upon God and partially dependent upon man (in other words, synergism), and thus denying the biblical truth of salvation by God’s grace in Christ alone?

In opposition to the popular and prevalent position of universal atonement, Bible-believing Presbyterian and Reformed Christians have historically held to a view which has come to be called “limited atonement” (or, to put it more positively, “definite atonement” or “particular redemption”).  This is the view that Christ’s atoning death on the cross, while certainly infinite in value and sufficient to save all without exception, was intended to benefit only a limited number of individuals; namely, the “elect”, those whom Scripture identifies as Christ’s “sheep”, those who (by God’s sovereign grace) come in due time to trust in Christ as their Savior (see, for example, John 10:11; compare with vv. 25-29).

In the historic Reformed understanding of the atonement, Christ did not die merely to make sinners savable.  Such a view denigrates the actual meaning of Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice by making it a mere hypothetical atonement, an atonement which might satisfy Divine justice if certain human conditions (namely, faith and repentance) are met.  But in the biblically Reforned understanding Christ did not die on the cross to offer the Father a mere hypothetical atonement for everyone without exception (i.e., an “atonement” which doesn’t actually atone without the help of human faith).  No, instead He died to actually secure the eternal salvation of all those whom the Father gave to Him, namely, His chosen ones – a great multitude from every tribe and tongue and people and nation (Revelation 5:9).

In other words, if Jesus died for you, your eternal salvation is absolutely certain and infallibly secure, for the Divine Son of God Incarnate has satisified the demands of Divine justice once-for-all and for all of your sins (past, present and future) – including your sins of unbelief and impenitence!

So, while the position of “universal atonement” actually limits the power and efficacy of Christ’s atonement (by teaching that it only makes sinners merely savable), the Reformed view only “limits” the atonement in the sense that it is designed by God and intended to benefit a limited number of human beings (namely, the elect, who in God’s timing become believers in Christ).  But, in the Reformed view, Jesus’ death actually saves (once and for all and forever!) those for whom He makes atonement!

“But what about the biblical requirement that sinners trust in Christ as their Savior and repent of their sins if they would be saved?”

Certainly the Reformed Faith affirms the necessity of repentance and faith.  The Reformed or “Calvinist” view of “limited atonement” offers no comfort to those who presume upon God’s grace and persist in the way of impenitence and unbelief.  We wholeheartedly affirm that the salvation Christ purchased for His people is received and experienced only in the way of true faith in Jesus Christ and repentance unto life.  And certainly we who are Reformed affirm the biblical truth that God commands all people everwhere to repent (Acts 17:30)!  Repentance and faith in Jesus Christ are universal duties enjoined upon all who are privileged to hear the gospel message.

At the same time, ultimately true saving faith and repentance are graces and gifts of God that God by His Spirit works within the souls of His elect in due time, and through the ordinary ministry of the Word.   Ultimately they are not works of man, but gifts of God, purchased by Christ for His elect (see Acts 11:18; 13:48; Ephesians 2:8; Philippians 1:29; etc.).  How could it be otherwise, since (as I explained in my blog article on Total Depravity) fallen man is spiritually dead in his trespasses and sins and thus incapable of converting himself by his own supposed “free will” (Ephesians 2:1; Romans 9:16; John 3:3; etc.).

What is the Reformed doctrine of “limited atonement” based upon?

First, it is based upon the nature of Christ’s death as a satisfaction for sin.

In the Bible, Christ’s atonement actually (not hypothetically) atones.  It is an atonement that actually secures the eternal redemption of God’s people.  A careful study of the Epistle to the Hebrews (especially, for example, chapter 9-10) will make this clear.  When we consider the fact that the Bible makes it abundantly clear that not all will be saved in the end (see, for example, Matthew 25:46; Second Thessalonians 1:8; Revelation 20:12-15; etc.), by logical necessity we can infer that not everyone’s sins have been atoned for by Christ.  Otherwise they would be saved.

Second, it is based upon explicit biblical teaching.

For example, in the good shepherd discourse in John chapter 10, the Lord Jesus explicitly states that He as the “good shepherd” lays down His life “for the sheep” (John 10:11, ESV).  Later in that passage He explains to the unbelieving Jews who rejected Him that the reason they do not believe in Him is “because you are not among my sheep” (v. 26, ESV).  If Christ laid down His life for His sheep, but these individuals are (by Christ’s own testimony) not among His sheep, then the clear implication is that Jesus Christ did not lay down His life for them – meaning that He did not die for them.  Later on, in John chapter 17, in our Lord’s “high priestly prayer”, Jesus makes it clear that He is praying to His Father for those whom the Father has given Him.  He explicitly says that He is not praying for the world (i.e., those not given to Him by the Father; see v. 9). This too implies that Jesus did not die for the purpose of saving them, since He refuses to pray for them as their high priest.  Futhermore, in Ephesians 5:25 the Apostle Paul states that Christ gave Himself up for the church (meaning, in this context, the “invisible church” – the elect of God).

“But what about all those passages that speak of God loving the world and Jesus dying for all?”

John 3:16 is a favorite among advocates of universal atonement.  And yet even that passage “limits” the benefits of Christ to those who believe in Him!  But in response to this kind of objection it should be pointed out that the terms, “world” and “all” and similar “universal” language, must be interpreted within their own contexts.  Often the terms “world” and “all” are used to indicate all without distinction (i.e., Jews and Gentiles, men and women, rich and poor, slave and free, etc.) rather than all without exception (i.e., every single human being without exception).

In addition, these words can often be used to make general statements which might have exceptions.  For example, if I make the statement that “Everyone knows that Donald Trump is the current President of the United States”, I am making a generic statement which is generally true, but to which there may be some exceptions.  Just as there is a semantic range of meanings to the words “all,” “everyone,” “world” and similar universal terms in the English language, so there is a similar range of meanings in the biblical languages.  Only a careful contextual study of each passage in question can make it clear how these words are being used in particular contexts, and I would make the case that there is no passage of Scripture which explicitly requires that we understand it to be teaching that Christ died for the purpose of saving each and every human being without exception.

The good news of “limited atonement” is that Jesus Christ died on the cross, not merely to make salvation possible, but to actually save sinners from their sins, and to infallibly secure for them their everlasting salvation!  While Christ’s atonement is effective only for His people, it is nonetheless sufficient for all.  Dear reader, do you recognize yourself to be a sinner in need of salvation?  Christ is offered to you in the gospel!  Repent and turn to Christ in faith.  Believe that Jesus’ death is sufficient to pay for your sins, and trust in Him as your very own Savior and Lord.  If, by God’s grace, you do, you can be assured that Jesus died, not merely to make your salvation a hypothetical possibility, but to actually save you from the guilt, the penalty and the power of your sin!  “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved…” (Acts 16:31, ESV).

If you are interested in digging deeper on this topic, I recommend that you read The Death of Death in the Death of Christ by John Owen (Edinburgh; Carlisle, PA:  The Banner of Truth Trust; Reprinted 1989)

Anyone who has ever attended a worship service at Lake OPC, or any other confessional Reformed and Presbyterian church, on a Sunday when the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is being observed, will notice that before administering the elements the minister will explain who may and who may not partake of the holy supper.  (This is a historic practice in the Reformed liturgy.)

While confessional Presbyterian churches like Lake OPC do not practice closed communion – which restricts communion only to those who belong in communicant membership to a particular church or denomination or family of denominations which share the same beliefs about the Lord’s Supper – at the same time neither do confessional Presbyterian churches practice open communion where everyone, without distinction or exception, is welcomed to participate.

Instead, confessionally Reformed and Presbyterian churches typically practice what could be described as restricted communion.  The practice is sometimes referred to as “fencing the table” (meaning that a verbal explanation and/or warning is given prior to administration of the sacrament).  This means that communion is restricted to those who meet certain criteria.  In the Orthodox Presbyterian Church these criteria include the following:

(1) You must be validly baptized in a professing Christian Church which upholds the biblical and historic Christian view of the Trinity.

Valid baptism with water, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in a church which (at least on paper) confesses the Holy Trinity, is the visible sign of initiation into the visible “catholic” (i.e., “universal”) church, and thus a prerequisite for participation in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.  Unitarian or “Jesus only” baptism, cultic baptism (for example, Jehovah’s Witness and Mormon baptisms), “gender-neutral” baptisms (which purge out reference to Father, Son and Holy Spirit and replace the Trinitarian Names with such designations as “Creator, Redeemer and Sustainer”) – all  such “baptisms” are in reality non-Christian baptisms, and thus invalid in the eyes of God.

(Please note that there is a difference between an invalid baptism – which is really no baptism at all – and an irregular baptism.  There are many examples of irregular baptisms – baptisms performed under less-than-ideal or extraordinary circumstances – which are nonetheless valid from a biblical standpoint.  For example, a baptism administered by a heretical or scandalously immoral pastor is still a valid baptism, so long as it is administered with water in the Name of the Trinity in a professedly Trinitarian church, even though such a baptism may be irregular with respect to the circumstances of its administration.)

(2) You must have made public confession of your faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior in the presence of a congregation of God’s people.

Passages like Matthew 10:32-33 and Romans 10:9 make it clear that an open confession of faith in Jesus Christ as Son of God and as one’s Lord and Savior is ordinarily a requirement for salvation (since such open confession of Christ is a fruit and evidence of true saving faith), and by implication a prerequisite for communicant membership in Christ’s visible church.

Furthermore, the very act of participating in the Lord’s Supper implies a reaffirmation of one’s public confession of faith in Christ.  Therefore, those who reject Christ as the Divine Son of God Incarnate who was crucified for sinners and raised bodily from the dead, or who do not personally trust in Christ as their very own Lord and Savior and are not personally repentant for their sins, desecrate the sacrament and bring judgment upon themselves if they presume to come to the holy table.  In addition, participation in the Lord’s Supper by unbelievers is an act of supreme dishonesty and hypocrisy, since unbelievers reject the very gospel that is signified and sealed in the holy supper.  (See, for example, the warning about unworthy partaking that is given by the Apostle Paul in First Corinthians 11:17-32.)

(3) You must be a member in good standing of a biblical church which preaches the gospel.

Church membership implies accountability.  It implies that you are willing to be subject to the God-ordained authority that Christ has entrusted to His visible church.  To wilfully and knowingly reject the accountability of responsible church membership is to reject one very important aspect of Christ’s Lordship.

While it is true that the Bible does not, in proof-text fashion, have an explicit command that says “Thou shalt be a church member if thou wouldst take the Lord’s Supper”, responsible church membership involving submission to the elders and overseers of the church is clearly implied as a given in the New Testament Scriptures.  (See, for example, Hebrews 13:7 & 17; First Peter 5:1-5, etc.  Also note that almost all of the New Testament Epistles were written to local congregations with a definite membership, such as the church in Corinth, the churches of Galatia, the church of Thessolonica, etc.  In addition, the Book of Acts describes the three thousand baptized converts on the Day of Pentecost as “those who were added” – Acts 2:41 – meaning added to the visible church.)

What about the requirement of being a church member “in good standing”?  What does “good standing” mean?  It means that you are not under any kind of church censure or church discipline.  For example, let’s say you had belonged to a biblical church which excommunicated you for scandalous, unrepentant sin.  This means you have been excluded from taking communion (hence “ex-communication”) due to your impenitence.  Due to your persistent impenitence the church has judged you to be outside of saving communion with Christ.  In such circumstances you are not a “member in good standing”, and thus you have no right in such circumstances to receive the visible emblems of such communion.  In such circumstances you may not receive the Lord’s Supper until such time as you repent, make amends and are publicly restored to good standing in the fellowship of Christ’s church.

“But pastor, why such restrictions?  And why do I need to be an actual member in good standing before I can take holy communion?”  Allow me to offer some further arguments in favor of our communion practice.

The belief that communion is only for those who are church members in good standing of a biblical church is a legitimate inference from the fact that, like baptism, the Lord’s Supper is an ordinance for the church.  It makes no sense for someone to partake of an ordinance appointed by Christ for His church if he/she is not an actual member of the church.  Christ instituted the Lord’s Supper with His apostles on the night in which He was betrayed, and the apostles were themselves the foundation of the visible church (Ephesians 2:20).  So, clearly, Christ intended this ordinance to be for those within His church, not those outside of it.  (Indeed, one of the functions of the sacraments is to make a clear distinction before the world between those who belong to Christ and His church and those who do not.)

A similar argument for this practice can be seen when we compare the old covenant sacraments of circumcision and the passover with baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  Under the old covenant administration Gentile foreigners to the covenant community of Israel could not eat the passover meal until their males were first circumcised (see Exodus 12:43-49).  In other words, before a Gentile could celebrate the passover he first had to become a Jew.  Such Gentile converts had to become members of God’s visible covenant people, at the time called Israel, before they could receive the covenant meal of the passover.  Likewise, in this new covenant age, an outsider to God’s covenant community of the church may not partake of the Lord’s Supper until he/she is first baptized and becomes a member of God’s covenant people, the church.

Finally, the New Testament teaches that under the new covenant the old covenant sacrament of circumcision (a bloody rite pointing forward to Christ) has been replaced by baptism (an unbloody rite pointing us back to Christ).  Likewise the passover (again, a bloody rite involving the death of the passover lamb) has been replaced by the Lord’s Supper (an unbloody rite pointing us back to Christ’s bloody sacrifice on the cross).  (For example, see Colossians 2:1-12 and First Corinthians 10:1-4, and also consider the fact that the Lord Jesus insituted the Lord’s Supper in the midst of celebrating the passover with His disciples.)

What is the conclusion?  If God’s people under the old covenant had to be members in good standing of the covenant community before they could participate in the covenant meal of the passover, so likewise God’s people under the new covenant have to be members in good standing of the visible covenant community of the church before they are welcome to partake of the covenant meal of the Lord’s Supper.

Of course, at Lake OPC and at most other confessional Reformed and Presbyterian churches we don’t have “communion bouncers”.  The Lord’s Supper is not a “presbyterian” supper.  Rather, it is the Lord’s Supper, and thus it is for the Lord’s people, whatever their church affiliation may be.  Nevertheless, it is a serious ordinance in Christ’s church, and therefore we in the OPC seek to make it clear who may and who may not partake – for God’s glory and for the spiritual welfare of those who would partake.

During the celebration of the Supper the minister offers a “verbal fencing” of the table, and the elders will usually try to pass the elements over those who are not yet able to take communion (for example, the communion plate will be handed past young children who have not yet publicly professed their faith).  But, once the verbal warning has been issued, the ultimate responsibility for partaking or not partaking of the holy supper rests upon the shoulders of those in attendance, who are summoned by Scripture and through the pastor’s exhortation to examine themselves of their fitness to partake (again, see First Corinthians 11:17-34).  Let us all take this solemn responsibility seriously.

In the previous blog article on “Why Sing Hymns? Part 1” I offered three reasons why I believe the church would do well to retain the biblical Psalms and the classic hymns of the church as the predominant (though not necessarily exclusive) resources of the church’s worship song.  To review, these three reasons are as follows:

(1) Good hymns are theologically rich and feed the Christian soul.

Good hymns have biblical and theological substance, and thus they edify and feed the soul of the believer.

(2) The classic hymns of the church connect contemporary Christians with the historic church.

Singing the great hymns of the faith reminds us that the Holy Spirit has been at work in all ages of church history, and that our faith is a multi-generational faith for all ages.

(3) Good hymns serve a catechetical purpose in the church.

Good, Bible-based and doctrinally-sound hymns reinforce the biblical truths that are preached from the pulpit and taught in the Sunday School.  They “preach” the Word in song.

In this blog article I want to offer three additional reasons (reasons # 4-6) why the church today would do well to continue the practice of singing the biblical Psalms and the classic hymns of the faith.

Before I offer these reasons, let me again reiterate what I stated in Part 1:  Let the reader understand that I am not, in reactionary fashion, saying that “old” equals “good” and “new” equals “bad.”  There are some old hymns that are theologically bad and shallow, just as their are some newer hymns and praise songs that are biblically faithful and sound.  The church would do well to avoid singing the former and should be open to singing the latter.  But, again, I would commend the biblical Psalms and classic hymns of the church as the predominant content of worship song in Christ’s church for the reasons under consideration.

And now for reasons # 4-6:

(4) Good hymns can help to close the generation gap in the Body of Christ.

There is no doubt that we in the West (and especially in the United States) live in a predominantly youth-centered culture.  Our culture almost idolizes youth.  Older people strive to look younger and as younger people eventually start to age they often strive to do everything they can to put off and cover up the effects of the natural aging process for as long as possible.

This youth-centric mindset has infiltrated the church to such a degree that even middle-aged and older pastors have often put off the dignified attire of their clergy robes or dark business suits in an attempt to look and dress more “hip” and “cool” so that they can “be relevant” and “relate to the young people.”  (Things like skinny jeans, sandals, and a Star Wars t-shirt, along with a few tatoos and body piercings, may make an athletically fit 20-something year old “youth pastor” look “hip” and “with it” at the annual youth retreat, but these same “youthful” duds on a balding, middle-aged pastor with a prominent pot belly and jiggling love handles just make him look silly and pathetic, if not a bit creepy too.)

But this youth-centric mindset not only shows up in terms of the casual, youthful attire that many clergy and congregants have adopted in our uber-causal, youth-centric age.  It has also infiltrated, to a large extent, the contemporary church’s practice of worship song.  Many contemporary churches have abandoned the classic hymns in favor of an exclusive use of contemporary worship songs led by a “praise band” (i.e., basically a soft rock band that leads the worship).  All done in the name of attracting and/or retaining young people in the church.  If this upsets the older people in the church, well, that’s just too bad.  They’re just “set in their ways” anyway, and they need to “get with the (youth-centric) program” if they want their church to continue to be “relevant.”  If they don’t like it, let ’em leave.

In this way the generation gap between young and old in the church gets amplified and widens even further, so much so that many larger churches have basically split their congregation in two by offering two separate, distinct worship services – one called “traditional” (for those crusty old folks who just can’t let go of their hymnals), and the other called “contemporary” (for the hip young people and other youthful congregants aspiring after hip-dom and “relevance”).  So much for the gospel of Christ bringing the generations together into one Body!

The problem with all of this is that God’s Word is not youth-centric.  On the contrary, if anything the Bible stresses the importance of honoring our elders as a vital duty for all of God’s people.

Of course, it is true that the Apostle Paul counseled the young pastor Timothy not to let anyone despise him for his youth (First Timothy 4:12).  The elderly certainly ought not to despise those who are younger, whether they be younger in age or younger in the faith.  At the same time, I believe that one of the keys to closing the generation gap that we often find in the church today is by encouraging a culture in the church that seeks to biblically honor those “seasoned saints” who have more years under their belt and therefore (as a general rule) more wisdom, maturity and stability to offer the church.

In Leviticus 19:32 God says:  “You shall stand up before the gray head and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God:  I am the LORD.” (ESV)  In the culture of Moses’ time, one of the ways that you showed respect for the elderly was to rise in their presence as a sign of that respect.  Showing honor to the elderly is closely connected to the reverent fear of God, and Israel’s covenant God reinforces this duty to show such honor with the solemn words, “I am the LORD” (“LORD” being a translation of “Yahweh”, the covenant Name of God).

What does this have to do with worship song?  Well, may I suggest that one way the church of Jesus Christ can “honor” the elderly and “rise up” before them is by favoring their musical choices in worship (provided, of course, that those choices are biblically and theologically sound).  In other words, if a church has to choose between sticking with a biblically-sound hymnal that is favored by older members of the church, and transitioning to the use of contemporary songs that might be more pleasing to the youth, if the older members of the church would be upset or offended by such a change, then I believe the biblical choice would be clear:  Let the youth of the church “stand up before the gray head” and keep using the hymnal, even if it might not be their personal preference.  Such an honoring of the wishes of the elderly in the church by the youth could do much to deepen respect and appreciation for the youth of the church by the “seasoned saints” in the congregation, and likewise it could help deepen the sanctification of the church’s youth by providing them with an opportunity for self-denial for the benefit of others.

(5) The singing of good hymns reminds believers that the singing of praise is worship, not entertainment.

Music is powerful.  I enjoy attending good musical concerts, whether the music be classical or contemporary.  I have a high regard for good musicians who perform their music masterfully.  But when attending a musical concert, it is clear that a concert is just that – a concert.  A performance.  In other words, entertainment.  But worship song is not entertainment.  No, it is worship (i.e., a vital element of biblical worship).

The congregational singing of good hymns reminds us that the singing of praise is worship, not entertainment.  The whole congregation sings together in one voice.  And hymns are written and designed for congregational use.  They are not designed to be performed by a select company of trained musicians.  But, at least in my limited experience of contemporary worship, often the worship songs are written in such a way that they are better performed by trained musicians (in this case the praise band) rather than being written in a way that encourages congregational participation.  This performance aspect of some contemporary worship songs sends the wrong message.  It tends to blur the line of distinction between worship and entertainment.  The classic hymns of the church avoid this, generally speaking.

(6) Good hymns are a source of great comfort for God’s people.

A number of years ago I faced a very stressful time in my life.  There were numerous pressures and life changes that closed in on me at the time, and I faced an uncertain future.  In the midst of this pressure-cooker period of my life I found myself one day driving alone down the highway.  As the road stretched before me tears started to well up as I just felt emotionally overwhelmed.  Then I decided to do something counterintuitive.  I decided to sing some hymns of praise to God.

One of the hymns I sang as I chugged down the highway, misty-eyed from anxiety, was “It Is Well.” The words of this precious hymn struck a chord in my heart:

“When peace like a river attendeth my way

When sorrows like sea billows roll

Whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say

It is well, it is well with my soul!

It is well, with my soul

It is well, it is well with my soul!”

Being reminded through that touching hymn that, because of Christ, it was indeed “well with my soul” flooded my heart with a sense of peace and calm, and brought great comfort to my soul, even in the midst of my stress.

One of the reasons why the great classic hymns of the faith have stood the test of time is not only because of their faithfulness to Scripture and theological orthodoxy, but also because they have proven over time to be a source of great comfort to generations of believers.  When the church robs younger generations of this precious treasure of hymnody, it also robs them of what could prove to be a powerful source of great comfort to them as they face the trials and tribulations of their Christian lives.  Let us not rob them of this resource of comfort.

Much else could be said, but I hope this has been enough to give the reader some food for thought on this issue.

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” (Colossians 3:16, ESV)

There are few things today that seem to divide Christians from one another more than the issues of “worship style” and worship song.  It used to be that professing believers would find it necessary to separate from fellow believers over deeply-held theological and denominational distinctives.  But in our contemporary context of widespread biblical and theological ignorance, where personal religious experience trumps sound biblical doctrine, it is the “worship wars”- in particular the issue of the classical hymns versus contemporary worship songs – that seem to cause the most division in the Body of Christ.  In fact, I suspect that for many Christians today, if put in a position of having to choose between a church that was more biblically orthodox and faithful but which did not offer one’s preferred worship style, and a church which was less biblically consistent and less doctrinally sound, but offerred a “worship experience” more suited to one’s personal musical and liturgical preference, would put “worship style” over sound doctrine and choose the church which was more musically and stylistically to their liking.

There are many things about the “worship wars” in the churches which are regrettable and unnecessary.  For example, there can be hardened attitudes and a dead traditionalism on all sides of the contemporary versus traditional worship debate (yes, not just on the side of those who advocate for the exclusive use of traditional hymns, but even on the “contemporary” side, where the singing of contemporary worship songs has sometimes become a newly fossilized liturgical tradition that pushes out the older hymns of the faith in the name of “relevance”).  Certainly, as believers on both sides of this liturgical divide dialogue and try to understand each other, they should do so in a spirit of Christian civility, mutual respect and a desire for genuine spiritual unity in Christ’s Body.  But at the same time differences must be honestly faced.

In this article I want to offer a number of reasons why I believe Christ’s church would do well to continue to use the biblical Psalms and the classic hymns of the faith as the predominant (though not necessarily exclusive) material for the church’s worship song.

Lest the reader misunderstand where I’m coming from, let me make it clear that I am not arguing that old = good and new = bad.  I am not saying that all traditional hymns are biblically sound and theologically substantive, or that all contemporary worship songs are by definition biblically and theologically shallow or flawed.  On the contrary, one can find a number of traditional hymns which are theologically shallow, sentimental, and devoid of biblical content, just as one can find a number of contemporary worship songs which are biblically and theologically rich.  Let the reader understand that I am not saying that we should exclude all contemporary worship songs from our worship services, or that we should only sing hymns from our authorized hymnal (which, in our case, is the Trinity Hymnal).  (In fact, Lake OPC recently obtained a CCLI license, which allows us to include a wide range of worship songs not found in our hymnal in either bulletin inserts or overhead projections, and we do on occasion sing high-quality contemporary worship songs in our services.)

So why would the contemporary church do well to retain the predominent use of the biblical Psalms and classical hymns of the faith in its worship practice.  Here are a number of considerations:

(1) Good hymns are theologically rich and feed the Christian soul.

Good, classical hymns of the faith have biblical and theological substance which can edify and feed the soul of the believer, whereas many (though certainly not all!) contemporary worship songs tend to be biblically and theologically shallow and are thus inadequate as spiritual food to the soul.

Consider, for example, the first verse of that classic hymn “O Worship the King”:

“O worship the King, all glorious above,

O gratefully sing His power and His love,

Our Shield and Defender, the Ancient of Days,

Pavilioned in splendor and girded with praise.”

In this hymn God is extolled as the Divine, all-glorious King, the Shield and Defender of His people, the Ancient of Days (see Daniel 7:13), indicating His eternality.  This brief verse is God-centered, biblically-grounded and theologically-rich.  It is rich spiritual food for the Christian soul.

Compare and contrast this rich, substantive hymn to the chorus of a popular contemporary Hillsong worship song:

“Your fire fall down

Your fire fall down

On us we pray

As we seek…

Show me Your heart

Show me Your way

Show me Your glory.”

Aside from the fact that it is questionable how biblical it is to pray for God’s “fire” to fall down upon us, since in Scripture the falling of God’s fire is often a picture of God’s holy wrath and judgment, notice how man-centered and theologically shallow this chorus is. (“Show me Your heart…Show me Your way…Show me Your glory…me, me, me – it’s all about me.)  Furthermore, as I’ve heard this chorus sung, it is repeated multiple times, becoming almost a “Jesus mantra”.  While singing such a worship chorus over and over and over again at the leading of a skillful praise band might emotionally manipulate worshipers to have a powerful, emotional religious experience, almost no biblical content is conveyed in actual chorus, and thus it is practically worthless in edifying the believer or leading her/him on to spiritual maturity.

Or consider the chorus of another contemporary worship song, written by popular contemporary Christian musician Chris Tomlin:

“You’re a good, good father,

It’s who you are, it’s who you are, it’s who you are,

And I’m loved by you,

It’s who I am, it’s who I am, it’s who I am.”

This song has at least some biblical truth to it.  Certainly God is a gracious and good heavenly Father to those who are in Christ, and we believers are certainly loved by Him.  However, it is only because of Christ’s incarnation and atonement on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins that God can relate to us as a good and gracious Father, and not as an offended, righteous Judge.  And it is precisely any clear reference to the Person and work of Christ that is missing in this otherwise touching song.

Contrast this theologically-shallow Tomlin song with the first verse of the classic Charles Wesley hymn, “Arise, My Soul, Arise”:

“Arise, my soul, arise, shake off your guilty fears;

the bleeding Sacrifice in my behalf appears:

before the throne my Surety stands, before the throne my Surety stands,

my name is written on his hands.”

This gospel-saturated hymn points the believer to the ultimate basis for his right standing before the “good, good Father” in heaven, namely, the bloody sacrifice of Christ as our Surety before the throne of the Father.  It is the sacrificial death of Christ for sinners which demonstrates God the Father’s goodness and love (Romans 5:8).  Again, good hymns are biblically-faithful, theologically-rich, and they feed the Christian soul with the truth of God, not with mere emotional sentiment reflective more of adolescent angst than of biblical fidelity.

(2) The classic hymns of the church connect contemporary Christians with the historic church.

When we as 21st century Christians sing the Psalms of Scripture and the great classical hymns of the faith, we are joining our voices with the voices of past generations of past Christians who fought the fight of faith, ran the race of discipleship, and who thus encourage us as we strive through the grace of God to fight the good fight and run the race of faith that is set before us.  When we cut ourselves off from the classic hymns of the church and opt for only that which is contemporary, in a sense we cut ourselves off from the communion of the saints who have gone before in past ages.  Thus we impoverish ourselves and our churches.  Singing Psalms and the classic hymns of the church reminds us that Christianity is a historic faith and that it is a multi-generational communion!  Singing only contemporary worship songs in church implicitly teaches that God has only been at work in the here-and-now, or that what God did in the past is “irrelevant” to what He is doing in the present.

(3) Good hymns serve a catechetical purpose in the church.

The wording of Colossians 3:16 (which I quoted at the beginning of this article) seems to indicate that one of the ways we “teach” and “admonish” one another is through the singing of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.  Many of us learned the English alphabet through singing the alphabet song.  Likewise, worship song is a great way to teach the “a-b-c’s” of the Faith.  Teaching the faith to new believers and to future generations is greatly enhanced through the singing of Psalms and biblically-faithful hymns of the faith.  Thus the hymnody of the church undergirds the church’s preaching, instruction and catechesis.  If the steady diet of the church’s worship song is biblically and theologically-shallow, we should not be surprised if the contemporary church begets biblically ignorant and theologically shallow Christians.

We will consider some further reasons to retain the predominent use of hymnody in the church’s worship practice in Part 2.

When it comes to the doctrine of election, the bottom line is this:  Does God choose us for salvation because we first choose Him; or do we choose Him because He first chose us?

Christians of a non- or anti-Calvinist persuasion usually “choose” the former position (pun intended); whereas Christians of a Reformed and Calvinist persuasion affirm the latter.

Those who opt for the former position believe that God’s election of us is conditioned upon something that He sees in us or something we do to earn His choice; whereas Calvinists believe that God’s choice of us in Christ is not conditioned upon anything that God sees in us, whether foreseen faith or works or both; hence the Calvinist view is that God’s election of us is unconditional.  God’s choice of us in not conditioned upon anything in human beings that moves God to choose them.  Rather, it is because God has chosen them in His grace that His chosen ones respond to His gracious initiative with a living faith, a genuine repentance from sin, and an earnest life of discipleship.

The Bible clearly teaches a doctrine of election.  Many passages in both the Old and the New Testaments affirm that God “chooses”, “elects” and “predestines” a select number of people.  Consider just a small sampling of Scripture passages on this topic:

“It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.” (Deuteronomy 7:7-8, ESV; emphasis added)

“Remember the wondrous works that he has done, his miracles, and the judgments he uttered, O offspring of Abraham, his servant, children of Jacob, his chosen ones!” (Psalm 105:5-6, ESV; emphasis added)

“For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.” (Jesus Christ, in Matthew 24:24, ESV; emphasis added)

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” (Romans 8:29, ESV; emphasis added)

“Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect?  It is God who justifies.” (Romans 8:33, ESV; emphasis added)

“And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad – in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call – she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”” (Romans 9:10-12, ESV; emphasis added)

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.  In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved…In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will…” (Ephesians 1:3-6, 11, ESV; emphasis added)

“Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion…” (First Peter 1:1a, ESV; emphasis added)

And this is just a small sampling of such passages.

As the reader can hopefully see, it is only by a studied avoidance of passages like these that the careful Bible reader can miss being confronted with the biblical doctrines of election and its related doctrine, predestination.  But the issue is, how are such passages to be understood?  Does a correct understanding of such passages lead to a Calvinistic or a non-Calvinistic doctrine of election and predestination?

We in the Reformed Faith believe that a careful, contextual study of such passages supports the Calvinistic doctrine of unconditional election, and not non-Calvinist doctrines that result in one way or another in a conditional understanding of election.

Some non-Calvinists appeal to passages which speak of our election in Christ being based upon God’s “foreknowledge” (for example, see Romans 8:29 and First Peter 1:1-2).  The “foreknowledge” view of election basically teaching that God chose to save us believers even before He created the world because He foresaw in the future that at some point in our lives we would freely choose to accept Christ as our Savior.

Certainly we Calvinists don’t deny that God foresees everything that happens in the future, including our future choices.  (We would point out, however, that the reason God is able to do this is because God is absolutely sovereign and has foreordained everything that comes to pass, as taught in passages such as Ephesians 1:11.  The reason that God can foresee the future is not only due to His omniscience, but also because He has planned the future in His eternal decree.)  However, we would point out that our non-Calvinist friends have misunderstood the biblical concept of “foreknowledge”.

When the Bible speaks of God “foreknowing” someone, it doesn’t simply mean that God foresees the choices that individual will make.  Rather, just as Adam is said to have “known” his wife Eve in the sense of loving her intimately in the context of the covenant of marriage (see, for example, Genesis 4:1), God “knows” us believers in the sense of loving us with a special, covenantal, saving love.  Thus, when the Bible talks about God “foreknowing” individuals, it means that He has “fore-loved” them – i.e., He has chosen to love them in Christ with a saving love even from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4)!  So the “foreknowledge” view of election must be rejected as a false view based upon a misinterpretation of certain biblical passages.

Others seek to explain biblical reference to election by putting forward a doctrine of corporate election.  In other words, it is claimed that in the Bible God doesn’t choose individuals for salvation; rather, He chooses corporate groups (Israel in the Old Testament, the Church in the New Testament).  In this view the way to be identified as belonging to God’s “chosen” and “predestined” people is by choosing to identify yourself with the company of those who are followers of Jesus Christ – in other words, by choosing to believe in Christ and thus to become part of His elect Body, the Church.

Certainly most Calvinists won’t deny that there are corporate aspects to God’s electing purposes.  Yes, the Church corporate can rightly be referred to as God’s chosen people, collectively considered, and I believe the Bible would affirm such a designation.  However, a careful study of a number of key biblical texts (especially, for example, Romans chapter 9) will make it clear to the unbiased student of Scripture that God certainly does elect certain select individuals as individuals to be recipients of His saving grace in Jesus, while passing over others in the operations of His saving grace and leaving them in their own freely-chosen sin.  (For example, the contrast Paul makes in Romans 9:10-13 between God’s choice of Jacob over Esau makes it clear in that particular context that he is speaking of individual election and rejection, not a merely corporate election of the Israelites over the Edomites considered as collective people groups.)

Whether the non-Calvinist Christian adopts the foreknowledge doctrine of election, or the corporate election view, notice that both of these non-Calvinist doctrines of election assume one major thing:  They assume that God’s choice of us depends upon something we decide or something we do.  In other words, salvation is not wholly and exclusively by God’s grace, but by a grace plus works combination.  God’s election of us is not by His sovereign grace alone; rather, His “grace” of election is dependent, at least in part, upon our own will or our own works (or both).  Thus these non- and anti-Calvinist doctrines of election, when taken to their logical extreme, ultimately lead down the road to a false gospel of works-righteousness.

The Reformed and Calvinistic doctrine of unconditional election serves to guard the one main point of Calvinism that undergirds all the other points of the Calvinistic system:  namely, the truth that we sinners are saved by God’s grace, and by God’s grace alone!  From beginning to end, our salvation in Christ was planned, executed, applied by the unconditional grace of God alone, apart from anything we have done or ever can do.  And this is why the doctrine of unconditional election is, at heart, a gospel doctrine.

God’s choice to save us in Jesus Christ is grounded in His unconditional, unmerited, free and sovereign grace.  Period!  Sola Gratia (Grace Alone)!  Soli Deo Gloria (To God alone be glory)!  Let us glory in this precious Reformation doctrine, and let us proclaim it boldly and clearly in this age which is so saturated with and under the deluding spell of man-centered, man-glorifying, me-centered distortions of the biblical gospel.

Is Roman Catholicism Christian?

To some the answer to this question is an obvious “yes”.  “Of course Roman Catholicism is Christian!  That’s like asking is the city of Mecca Muslim.  The Roman Catholic Church is the largest body of Christians in the entire world.”

To others the answer to this question is an equally obvious “no”.  “Roman Catholicism isn’t truly Christian because it preaches a false gospel and teaches things that go against the truths of the Bible.”

What are we to think?  What would a biblically-based answer to this question look like?

Before seeking to answer this question let me offer several reasons why I think it is both a fair and an important question.

First of all, this is an important question for the very reason that the Roman Catholic Church does indeed profess to be a genuinely Christian church (indeed, it claims to be the one true church of Jesus Christ on earth); because it exercises such a large cultural and (in some cases) political influence throughout the world; and also because it boasts such a large membership worldwide.

It is also a fair question because not everything or everyone who claims to be “Christian” is, in fact, Christian, at least as measured by the only infallible standard of God’s Word.

So, is Roman Catholicism Christian?  The answer we give to that question depends upon how we define the term “Christian”, and also upon the different senses in which that term can be used.

I believe the answer to this question is:  In one sense, “yes”; in another sense, “no.”

Lest it seem like I’m trying obfuscate and complicate matters, allow me to explain.

First of all, all Bible-believing Christians should recognize that the Roman Catholic Church in her official teachings confesses and uphold many biblical, gospel based truths.  Orthodox Protestants and traditionalist Roman Catholics share a great deal in common, at least at the foundational level of “Mere Christianity” (to borrow the title from C.S. Lewis’ famous book).

For example, historic Catholics and Protestants share the same New Testament and agree that the Bible is, in some sense, the Word of God, a written Divine Revelation.

Together they confess the Bible-based truths summarized in the great ecumenical creeds, such as the Apostles’, Nicene and Athanasian Creeds.  For example, both Bible-believing Protestants and traditionalist Catholics confess belief in the Holy Trinity (the one true God existing eternally in three co-equal Persons:  Father, Son and Holy Spirit).  Both affirm the full Deity and full humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Both confess His miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the virgin Mary, His sinless life, His mighty miracles, His death upon the cross for our redemption from sin, His glorious bodily resurrection from the dead, His ascension into heaven, His reign at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, and His coming again at the end of this age to judge the living and the dead, and His bringing in of the eternal state.  And both (to the surprise of some Protestants) believe in the absolute necessity of Divine grace for eternal salvation.

Let it be said that, in the context of the increasingly secular, “post-Christian” culture in which we live, where rank unbelief and anti-Christian hostility seem to be the new norm, these commonly-shared Christian beliefs held by both biblical Protestants and traditionalist Catholics stand in sharp contrast to our contemporary secularist zeitgeist.

So, at this basic level of “Mere Christianity” and the ancient ecumenical creeds, Roman Catholicism is indeed “Christian.”

At the same time, and at a deeper level still, there is a sense in which Roman Catholicism, as it has evolved from medieval times into the contemporary world, is profoundly unChristian – even anti-Christian.  For while, at the level of “Mere Christianity” it is Christian, at the level of its’ distinctive teachings and practices it does indeed deny and/or distort the saving truths of the Bible.

For example, in response to the Protestant Reformation the Roman Catholic Church officially added the apocryphal (or “deuterocanonical”) books to the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, so that the Roman Catholic version of the Old Testament contains books that both Jews and Protestant Christians believe should not be there.  The Apostle Paul tells us that the “oracles of God” (i.e., the Old Testament Scriptures) had been entrusted to the people of the Jews (see Romans 3:2).  While the apocryphal books contain some valuable historical and devotional material, and while the Christian church has always read these books for edification (though, historically, not to establish doctrine), the Jews had never recognized the apocryphal books as being inspired by God, and therefore they were excluded from the Jewish canon of Scripture.  The Protestant Reformers accepted the Jewish canon of the Old Testament Scripture, in accordance with Romans 3:2.  But the Roman Catholic Church added uninspired books to the inspired Word of God — a very serious sin which is strictly forbidden by God and which calls down the anathema of God upon those who dare to add to or take away from God’s Word (see Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32; Revelation 22:18-19).

In addition to adding the uninspired apocryphal books to the inspired Word of God, the Catholic Church has added, over the years, many man-made traditions to the requirements of God’s Word, burdening the consciences of the faithful with a plethora of man-made ecclesiastical rules, rituals and laws with no clear warrant from Holy Scripture.  This, too, is profoundly unChristian.

Arguably the worst errors of Roman Catholicism relate to its teachings on human salvation.  While Romanism does recognize man’s need for Divine grace and the merits of Christ in order to be saved, its teaching on salvation in effect denigrates and denies both the absolute perfection and sufficiency of Christ’s saving work and the grace of God by teaching a doctrine of salvation by Divine grace plus human free will, Christ’s merits plus the (Spirit-wrought) merits of the believer, and justification by faith plus works.

Rome teaches that human salvation is accomplished by human free will cooperating with God’s grace.  But Scripture teaches that God’s election, and thus human salvation, “…depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy” (Romans 9:16, ESV).

Rome teaches that, while Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is sufficient for human salvation, His sacrifice on Calvary must be continuously re-presented to God the Father by a human priest through the “unbloody sacrifice” of the Roman Mass offered on altars in Roman Catholic churches.  In this way the absolute perfection, completion and efficacy of our Savior’s once-for-all sacrifice is denigrated and blasphemed.  For Scripture says of Christ our great High Priest:  “But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God…For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” (Hebrews 10:12, 14, ESV; emphasis added)

Rome teaches that justification is by faith in Christ plus the grace-wrought works of believers.  But the Bible teaches that we sinners are justified (i.e., declared righteous) before God by His grace alone, through faith in the merits of Christ alone, and apart from works (even grace-wrought works).  “Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due.  And to the one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.” (Romans 4:4-5, ESV)  “For by grace you have been saved through faith.  And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9, ESV)  Thus Rome in its official teachings denies the biblical gospel of justification by faith alone, teaching instead a false gospel of justification of faith plus works.  In doing this it has placed itself under the anathema of God (see Galatians 1:8-9).

Add to Rome’s errors in adding to the Scriptures and distorting the biblical message of salvation its idolatry in promoting religious prayers and devotion to Mary and the Saints, the Rosary, its promotion of priestly celibacy (contrary to First Timothy 3:2 which explicitly permits church leaders to be married), its post-Vatican II extension of salvation to nonbelievers (even ethical atheists according to the current pope), and its many other unbiblical teachings and practices, Roman Catholicism is, at a deeper level, profoundly anti-Christian.

So how are we to approach our Roman Catholic friends and neighbors?  Well, we can dialogue with them at the level of those things in which we agree.  We can even cooperate with them on a cultural level in terms of common cultural goals (for example, defending the unborn and promoting religious liberty).  We should reach out in love and friendship as good neighbors.  But at the same time we must “speak the truth in love” by bearing witness to the pure, biblical gospel and by exposing the errors of Romanism.  While Rome officially teaches much that is truly Christian, by mixing its profound errors in with the biblical truths it affirms, it ends up being even more dangerous, for profound truth mixed with profound error results in even more deceptive, alluring, potentially soul-destroying error.

The Bible teaches that fallen, unregenerate humanity is totally depraved.   As I pointed out in a previous post, this does not mean that the human race is as bad as it possibly can be (i.e., utter depravity); rather, it means that the spiritual disease of sin has radically corrupted every part and aspect of our humanity – including our minds, emotions, bodies, and even our wills.  As the Word of God testifies, apart from God’s regenerating grace we are spiritually dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1-3), dead to the things of God.  The natural, unregenerate man views the things of the Spirit to be folly (First Corinthians 2:14).  As was true of the wicked in the days of Noah, in God’s eyes and by the lofty standard of God’s holy law, every intention of the thoughts of fallen man’s heart is solely and continually evil (see Genesis 6:5).

How does this total depravity or radical corruption impact the human will and fallen man’s ability to make choices?  Certainly the Scriptures indicate that human beings make choices all the time.  We are not puppets on a string.  Even the unregenerate make choices every day that are unconstrained by external coercion.

However, the Scriptures also indicate that, when it comes to spiritual things (such as trusting Christ as He is offered in the gospel, repenting of sin, and living in newness of life), the human will is not free.  Rather, the human will is in bondage to sin.

What this means is that, while we by nature are capable of making all kinds of choices when it comes to natural things (for example, things such as what career to pursue, whether and whom to marry, what to purchase at the food store, what clothes to wear, etc.), yet because of total depravity and original sin we are incapable of converting ourselves to Christ and living genuinely sanctified lives by our own free choice.  Apart from God’s sovereign grace we possess no genuine inner desire or disposition toward trusting in and living for Jesus Christ as He is revealed in the Scriptures or of accepting the truth of His Word.

So, if we cannot convert ourselves or even incline or prepare ourselves for conversion, what then are we to do?  If we cannot by our own free will create saving faith within our hearts and instead rely entirely upon God in sovereign grace to grant us the miracle of the new birth before we can exercise saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and repentance unto life, then what are we to do in the meantime if we find ourselves uncertain with respect to our present spiritual condition?  Are we simply to passively wait upon God to move in our hearts before we take action in spiritual things?  Are we to delay doing anything in terms of spiritual exercises until we somehow feel the Spirit moving upon our souls?  The biblical and reformed answer to such questions is a resounding “No!”  No, God’s Word calls upon us sinners to take vigorous action in pursuing spiritual things, even while it also warns us against trusting in our spiritual actions to somehow merit grace from God or to put God in our debt to show us favor.

While it is true that the unregenerate cannot choose by their own wills to convert themselves to Christ, they can choose to place themselves in a position where God is ordinarily pleased to display His saving grace.  For example, the Bible makes it clear that God uses the preaching of the gospel as His instrument to bring sinners to saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 10:17 – “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” ESV).  If you want God to grant you the gift of faith in Jesus Christ, then sit regularly under the faithful preaching and teaching of God’s Word.  (By the way, if you have a genuine desire to exercise saving faith in Christ, that may very well be an indication that you already possess such faith.)  Find a faithful, orthodox church that believes and confesses the Bible as God’s trustworthy Word, and which features expository preaching and teaching from the Bible, and determine to regularly attend the services of such a church.

In addition, you can read, study and meditate upon the Bible for yourself.  “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.” (Psalm 1:1-2, ESV; emphasis added)  Do you wish to be blessed?  Then meditate on the Word of God continuously throughout the day.  Expose yourself regularly to the Word of God, not only through diligent and faithful attendance upon the public ordinances of God’s worship at a local Bible-believing reformed church, but also through private, prayerful Bible study.

Furthermore, avail yourself of good theological literature.  For example, familiarize yourself with the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Westminster Shorter and Larger Catechisms, since these are excellent summaries of Bible teaching which can help to ground you in the truths of Divine revelation.

Another important exercise is prayer.  Cry out to God for mercy.  Pray that God would give you the gift of the Holy Spirit and grant you the grace of conversion.  God’s Word promises that whoever calls upon the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation will be saved (see Romans 10:8-13).  Call upon the Lord and, through His grace, trust in His promises!

The Word of God indicates that God is ordinarily pleased to grant His elect the gifts of faith and repentance within the context of the diligent use of the means of grace (primarily the Word and Sacraments, secondarily and responsively through prayer).  Our diligence in using these means of grace are not good deeds we perform that somehow merit or constrain God’s favor.  Instead they are God-ordained instruments or means by which God is pleased to work in the hearts and lives of His elect, bringing them to faith and nurturing and preserving them in that faith.

I remember a professor I once had in seminary who shared a story about a skeptical acquaintance of his.  As I recall the story, this acquaintance had many questions and doubts about the Christian faith, but nevertheless, in spite of his doubts, he decided to attend services at a local, Bible-believing church.  Gradually, over time, as he sat week after week under the faithful preaching and teaching of God’s Word and involved himself in the life of the Christian fellowship, this doubter eventually became a firmly-convinced believer.  As he allowed himself to be exposed over time to the gospel message, the Holy Spirit did a work in his heart and drew him decisively to faith in Christ and into the Body of Christ.  From what I recall my professor saying, this was a gradual, almost imperceptible process, not a dramatic, crisis conversion.  Nevertheless, it is a perfect illustration of what I am trying to say in this post.  Whether the Spirit converts a man suddenly and dramatically after only one hearing of the gospel, or gradually over time after much exposure to the Word of God, the results are the same.

Apart from Christ we are spiritually dead and totally depraved.  Our wills are in bondage to sin, and we can do nothing of ourselves to convert ourselves or to “choose Christ” apart from the intervention of His sovereign grace.  But we can “choose” to expose ourselves to the gospel message and to diligently use those God-ordained means that the Holy Spirit has appointed for bringing His people to faith in Christ and for nurturing, confirming and preserving them in that faith – namely, the Word and the Sacraments, along with prayer and in the context of the Christian fellowship of the visible church.  Dear listener, whatever may be the present condition of your soul before God, are you choosing to diligently avail yourself of the means of grace that God offers to you through His visible church?  If so, may God in His sovereign mercy make those means effective for your salvation.  If not, understand that you will have only yourself to blame on Judgment Day for neglecting those means by which God offers His grace to you.  “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts…” (Psalm 95:7b-8a, ESV).

What does your baptism mean to you?  If you are a baptized Christian, having received the sacrament of Holy Baptism, either as an infant or as a professing believer, in (or “into”) the Name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19) in a Christian Church, what is the ongoing significance of your baptism to your life as a follower of Jesus Christ?

As I look out onto the landscape of contemporary American Christianity, it seems to me that many professing believers give little, if any, thought to the significance of their baptism.  This is alarming, and not a good sign for the spiritual health of the contemporary church, since the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are solemn practices that Christ clearly commanded as perpetual observances in His church.

Saturated with extreme individualism and under the sway of revivalist influences, much of contemporary Christianity places such a strong emphasis on the believer’s “personal relationship with Jesus” and on the presence of God allegedly being mediated through the well-staged, highly emotional “worship experience” of contemporary praise & worship music, that the sacraments which the very Son of God instituted for perpetual observance in His church tend to get marginalized into a category of secondary importance in the life of the church.(1)

From the standpoint of the Holy Scriptures and the Reformed Confessions, what, then, is the significance of Holy Baptism in our lives as disciples of Jesus Christ?  Many things could be said in response to this question, but in this article I want to focus on just three aspects of our baptism which should make a powerful impact upon our Christian lives.

1. Your Baptism is a Divine Pledge of Grace

Due to the prevalence of Baptistic theology within contemporary evangelicalism, many Christians today view Holy Baptism as primarily an outward and public affirmation of their personal commitment to Jesus Christ.  In other words, for them Baptism means “I have decided to follow Jesus.”  In their view it is not primarily about what Jesus does for them, but about what they do for Jesus in committing their lives to Him.

Now, certainly, in the case of a missionary Baptism, where a previously-unbaptized adult from a non-Christian background is converted to faith in Christ, such a Baptism does indeed include the idea of a public testimony to their confession of faith in Christ.  In the case of such adult converts their baptisms are accompanied by a public profession of faith.  We see this, for example, in the Book of Acts, which provides a record of the missionary activity of the early apostolic church.  However, from a broader biblical and confessional standpoint this is not the primary or central meaning of Baptism.  Instead, as a sign and seal of God’s covenant of grace in Christ (like its old covenant counterpart in the sacrament of circumcision – Romans 4:11-12), your baptism is not primarily about your commitment to Jesus, but about Jesus’ commitment to you!

Instead of meaning “I have decided to follow Jesus!”, your baptism is a symbolic declaration of the gospel (“good news”) of Christ to you personally.  It is a “visible sermon” wherein the risen Lord Jesus Christ in essence says to you as a believer, “I wash you clean of yours sins by My blood, I renew you by My Holy Spirit.”  In other words, it is an outward Divine pledge and promise in symbol form.  It is the gospel message in sacramental form.  Saving faith believes the good news conveyed by this Divine pledge in Baptism, while unbelief rejects the good news or replaces it with an emphasis on human works or human decision.

Of course, the act of Baptism does not in itself necessarily convey the grace that it signifies.  The Holy Spirit must bless the use of this means of grace, and the baptized person must embrace the grace pledged in Baptism with a heart of true faith in Christ and repentance unto life, leading to a life of discipleship wherein the baptized believer walks in “newness of life” (Romans 6:3-4) as a committed follower of Jesus.  However, the point here is that our Baptism does not picture us ascending to God by our own act of public commitment to Christ (a view that essentially turns Baptism into an act of works-righteousness); rather, it depicts God descending to us by His amazing grace in Christ and pledging His saving and renewing grace to the baptized person who (through grace) believes in Christ.

2.  Your Baptism is a Mark of God’s Ownership

Right before His ascension into heaven our risen Lord Jesus Christ commanded His church (represented by the Apostles whom He addressed) to baptize the nations “into (eis in the Greek) the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).  To be baptized “into” the Divine Name of the Triune God involves (among other things) being formally and officially brought under the sovereign Lordship and Authority of God.  In other words, Baptism is a mark of God’s special ownership of the baptized.

Of course, as the Creator and providential King over all, God “owns” everything and everyone.  However, by virtue of their Christian Baptism, the baptized belong to the Triune God in a special way.  If you have been baptized with valid, Trinitarian Baptism, then you have been formally brought into special covenant relationship to God.  God in Christ and by His Spirit is your covenant Lord and King, and you are a covenant subject.  This means that your baptism places a special covenantal obligation upon you to repent of sin, trust in Christ alone for your salvation, and walk in newness of life according to God’s Word.  If you break this baptismal covenant through persistent impenitence and unbelief, the fact that you were baptized will not help you on the Day of Judgment; instead, your baptism is a sign testifying that you will be drowned in the judgment of God (just as the impenitent in the days of Noah were drowned in the great flood – see First Peter 3:18-22).  But if, by God’s sovereign grace, you respond positively to God’s baptismal covenant with you through trust in Christ and repentance from sin, then your baptism testified that you belong to God, both now and forevermore, and that He will never leave you nor forsake you!  Dear reader, do you believe this good news signified by your baptism?

3.  Your Baptism is a Summons to a Life of Discipleship in the Fellowship of Christ’s Church

For the vast majority of Christians throughout most of church history, Holy Baptism was viewed as the beginning of the Christian life and the gateway to discipleship.  Baptism was a sign of initiation into Christ and His church, and thus of initiation into the life of discipleship.(2)  That Christian life was further nurtured and strengthened through the ordinary ministry of the Word and the Holy Supper, and through spiritual disciplines such as prayer.  In the words of The Westminster Confession of Faith:  “Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church; but also, to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.  Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in his church until the end of the world.” (Chapter 28.1; emphasis added)  This confessional teaching is clearly based upon the truths revealed in the Scriptures (for example, Acts 2:38-39, 42; Romans 6:3-5; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:11-14; etc.).

But in much of contemporary Christianity the biblical and historic role of Holy Baptism as the formal beginning of the Christian life, and thus as an ongoing summons to a life of discipleship, has been replaced by unbiblical revivalistic traditions such as the “sinner’s prayer” and the “altar call”.

In contemporary revivalist Christianity you become a fully initiated Christian when you make a “decision for Christ” by either going forward at the end of a service when the preacher calls people forward to the front of the auditorium (i.e., the “altar call”), or by praying in private a special formulaic prayer wherein one “invites Jesus into your heart” (i.e., the “sinner’s prayer”), or by a combination of the two.  When a professing believer in the revivalist tradition who has already prayed the sinner’s prayer lapses or backslides in his Christian life, instead of repenting and seeking restoration to the church and comfort at the Lord’s Table, he is directed to express his repentance and receive renewing grace by going forward at the next “altar call” to “rededicate” his life to Christ.  These innovative practices grew out of the Second Great Awakening, and were unknown in the Christian world prior to about the late-1800s.  In essence these contemporary revivalistic practices have become the new sacraments, marginalizing if not replacing the “old” biblical sacraments of Holy Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

Now, of course, I am not denying that we sinners must exercise personal faith in Christ and repent of sin in order to be saved.  We indeed must “decide for Christ”, and we must publicly identify as followers of Christ through a public profession of faith if we expect to be saved (see Romans 10:9).(3)  However, we must recognize that God promises to nourish and strengthen our faith through those means of grace that He has ordained, not through creative innovations of merely human origin.  One of those means of grace is Holy Baptism, and through your baptism God summons you to a daily, renewed, ongoing repentance from sin and faith in Christ.  Your baptism is not only a Divine Pledge of grace to you as a believer; it is also a Divine Summons for you to walk in newness of life as one who has been united to Jesus Christ, your Lord and Savior, in His death and resurrection (Romans 6:3-5)!  May you and I heed this summons to discipleship!

In conclusion, our baptisms have deep and rich spiritual significance in our lives as followers of Jesus Christ.  Whether you were baptized as an infant or received Baptism as a professing believer, your baptism helps to shape and define your identity as a disciple of Jesus Christ.  You are baptized!  You belong to Jesus, and He belongs to you!  In a contemporary church culture which devalues the importance and significance of the sacraments that Christ has ordained for His church, let us swim against the contemporary anti-sacramental tide by treasuring this important means of grace and by seeking to live out the significance of our baptisms in the context of our daily lives and callings.

_________________

(1) I am given to understand that some contemporary mega-churches exclude the observance of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper from their main Sunday morning services, relegating them instead to either a Sunday evening service or a midweek service.  What this likely means is that many members and attendees of such churches never observance sacraments like the Lord’s Supper.  I understand the practical challenges of trying to administer the Lord’s Supper to a huge assembly of worshipers, but excluding these vital means of grace from the main Lord’s Day worship service sends the message that the sacraments are optional for the believer, and thus that Christians need not take seriously their Lord’s command to “Do this in remembrance of me…”  And for individual professing believers to neglect the sacraments is to live in open rebellion against the Lordship of Christ, who commanded the observance of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper as central, ongoing practices in His church.

(2) Likewise, while Holy Baptism was a sign of beginning grace, the Lord’s Supper (also called “Holy Communion” or “The Eucharist”) was viewed as a sign of continuing grace, as spiritual nourishment for the ongoing journey and pilgrimage of the Christian life.

(3) In churches like The Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) which practice infant baptism, provision is made for the baptized children of believers to publicly confess their faith in and allegiance to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior by providing them with an opportunity to publicly confess their faith in Christ before the church.  (Other traditions make provision for this need through the rite of “Confirmation”.)  In the OPC, once a baptized covenant child is judged by the Session to be old enough and sufficiently catechized to make a credible, mature profession of faith in Christ, having been successfully interviewed for communicant membership by the Session, the young person’s profession of faith before the Session is approved and he or she is publicly received into the communicant membership of the church during a regular Lord’s Day worship service through public confession of faith.  Once one is received into the communicant membership of the church, one is granted the right and privilege of receiving the Lord’s Supper, or “Holy Communion” (hence the status of “communicant” membership, “communicant” indicating “able to take communion”).

There are five central doctrines in the Calvinist system of salvation.  These doctrines are unsurprisingly called “the five points of Calvinism”.  They are also known as the “doctrines of grace”.  A common device for memorizing these doctrines is the “TULIP” acrostic, which summarizes these five points as follows:

T = Total Depravity

U = Unconditional Election

L = Limited Atonement

I – Irresistible Grace

P = Perseverance of the Saints

As I hope to show, these five biblical doctrines logically involve each other, and thus they stand and fall together.  If even one of these five doctrines is compromised or denied, the logic of the whole system falls apart.  The “TULIP” stands or falls together!  Together these doctrines highlight the one, ultimately foundational truth of Calvinism, namely, the truth that the salvation of sinners is by God’s sovereign grace, and by God’s sovereign grace alone!

In this brief article I want to consider the first point of the Calvinist system, the doctrine that goes by the name of “total depravity”.  Actually, this particular doctrine is not itself a doctrine of grace.  Instead, it is a doctrine which demonstrates why our salvation can only be – indeed, must be – by God’s sovereign grace in Christ alone, apart from human works or merits or human free will.  It is a doctrine which highlights mankind’s total ruin and corruption in sin, and hence man’s total inability to pull himself out of a state of sin or to contribute anything whatsoever toward his own salvation.

What, then, is this doctrine of “total depravity”?  Like the other five points of Calvinism, this doctrine has often been misunderstood and misrepresented.  So let me first of all explain what this doctrine does not mean.

First of all, total depravity does not mean that we sinners are, by our fall in Adam, as utterly and entirely wicked as we possibly can be.  The total in total depravity does not mean absolute depravity.  The devil and his demons are absolutely depraved.  They are absolutely as evil as they possibly could be, with no residual remnants of good remaining within them.  But that is not the case with fallen man.  The Scriptures indicate that even fallen, unregenerate sinners still bear the remnants of the image of God (see, for example, Genesis 9:6; James 3:9).

In addition, and closely related to the above, total depravity does not mean that unbelievers are incapable of performing outwardly good deeds, deeds which are beneficial both to themselves and to others.  (Theologians describe the good deeds of unbelievers as “civil righteousness”, meaning deeds that are outwardly in conformity to God’s Law, even though they lack the inward motivation of love for God produced by the Holy Spirit’s regeneration.)

So what, then, is “total depravity”?  It is the biblical teaching that, because of humanity’s fall into a state of sin in Adam, all people are born with a sin nature (which theologians call “original sin”).  This sin nature impacts the totality of our being.  Our minds, emotions, hearts and wills are radically twisted and corrupted by sin, so much so that we are totally corrupted, spiritually-speaking, and thus totally incapable of converting ourselves or making ourselves pleasing to God.

Speaking of Adam’s and Eve’s sin in eating the forbidden fruit, the Westminster Confession of Faith describes humanity’s total depravity as follows:  “By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.” (Chapter 6, Section 2; emphasis added)

Because of original sin and total depravity, all human beings are turned away from their Creator and turned in upon themselves.  As a result the human heart has become a factory of idols (as John Calvin once said).  Our natural, fallen inner disposition is to hate the God of the Bible – the true and living God who created us – and to replace Him with gods (or “concepts of god”) more to our liking.  Only a supernatural, spiritual rebirth from above can renew the hearts of totally depraved sinners and convert them to faith in Christ and repentance unto life.

This doctrine of man’s total depravity is clearly revealed in the Bible.  For example, Genesis 6:5 contains God’s assessment of the people who lived in the days of Noah before the great Flood:  “The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (ESV)  Notice that not just “some”, not just “many”, not just “most”, but “every” intention of man’s heart was “only” (not “somewhat” or “mostly”, but “only”) evil “continually”!  Or consider Paul’s description of the spiritual condition prior to their conversion of the Christians he writes to in Ephesians, as recorded in Ephesians 2:1-2a – “And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked…” (ESV; emphasis added)  Not just “sick” in sin; not just “wounded” by sin; not just “damaged” by sin; but dead in sin – and thus dead to God and to the things of God!

This biblical truth of total depravity is foundational to the whole Calvinist system, because it shows how incapable we are of saving ourselves or contributing in even the slightest way to our salvation.  And therefore it shows how desperately we sinners need for God to intervene in sovereign grace to rescue us from our desperate condition of sin and misery, and from the condemnation we deserve because of our sins.  In brief, total depravity underscores the truth that we are sinners who desperately need to be rescued from our condition, and who thus desperately need a Divine Savior suitable to the task.