The Gospel and The Kingdom

Tomorrow morning, I will be using a few quotes from David Brainerd in my sermon. The title of the sermon is “A Biblical Approach to Life” from James 4:13-17. If ever there was a man completely resigned to God’s will for his life, it was the short-lived yet incredibly powerful life of David Brainerd. I have read The Life and Diary of David Brainerd edited by Jonathan Edwards three times. While some find this work boring and an all-around drudge to read, I find in this a man completely honest with himself and his thoughts towards God.

As I spent time in reading about this man’s life, I put together my own time line of the events in his life. I will post it below, in hopes of two things, really. (1) That you would become more knowledgeable of whom I speak in the sermon and (2) that you would be encouraged to spend some time in reading about the life of David Brainerd yourself, if you have not already. I highly commend to you the book mentioned above, The Life and Diary of David Brainerd, which may be easily acquired here.

Timeline of the
Life of David Brainerd

· Born April 20, 1718.

· Father dies May 24, 1727, age 9, which has great impact on his melancholy disposition in life.

· Converted on July 12, 1739 at age 21.

· January 1740, he first becomes ill with measles while studying at Yale. This is the first of many illnesses to come.

· March 1741 he becomes drawn into Great Awakening under the preaching of one, Gilbert Tennent when he was preaching at Yale.

· Spring 1742 he was expelled from Yale just one year prior to his completion of his degree for attending a New Light “separate” meeting and allegedly making negative comments about then rector Thomas Clap.

· July 1742 he was licensed by the Eastern District of Fairfield County to preach in their congregations.

· August 1742 he preaches to the Indians for the first time from the text Job 14:14, “If a man dies, shall he live again?” He preached at a village along the Houstatonic River called Scaticook in Connecticut.

· Mid-November 1742 he is examined by the Society in Scotland for the Propagating of Christian Knowledge (SSPCK) and later commissioned as their missionary.

· March 14, 1743, he leaves for Stockbridge, Massachusetts to study the Indian tongue under veteran missionary John Sergeant.

· July 1743 he completes the building of his 1^st cottage to dwell among the Indians at Kaunaumeek.

· Mid-September he meets Jonathan Edwards at Yale’s fall commencement.

· May 1744 he leaves his current work among the Kaunaumeek without much success to go and serve along the Forks of the Delaware (his original intended destination among appointment with the SSPCK) and the Indians that lived there.

· June 12, 1744 he was ordained by the Presbytery of New York. Jonathan Dickinson and Aaron Burr examined him and Ebenezer Pemberton preached his ordination charge.

· December 1744 he moves into his 2^nd cottage to live and serve among the Indians along the Forks of the Delaware.

· June 19, 1745, he arrives at Crossweeksung to minister to the Indians there. This is the location where he would be allowed to see the fruits of his ministry.

· July 1745 1^st baptism of Indians. This baptism occurring at the Forks of the Delaware.

· August 25, 1745 2^nd baptism of Indians. This baptism occurring at Crossweeksung.

· December 1745 he began holding a weekly Saturday evening catechetical lecture to provide the natives with systematic doctrinal training based on the Westminster Shorter Catechism.

· June 1746 3^rd baptism of Indians. This one also occurring at Crossweeksung.

· November 2, 1746 he is taken seriously ill – at which he would never recover.

· November 5, 1746 he arrives at the home of Jonathan Dickinson to recuperate.

· March 20, 1747, he makes final visit to Indians.

· April 14, 1747, David’s brother John is commissioned to take over his brother’s ministry among the Indians.

· May 1747 he arrives at the home of Jonathan Edwards where he will spend the final days of his life this side of glory.

· September 1747 he attends his last church service.

· October 9, 1747 David Brainerd passed away sometime in the first hours of dawn.

· October 12, 1747, Jonathan Edwards preaches David Brainerd’s funeral. His text was taken from 2 Cor. 5:8 and the title of his sermon was, “True Saints, when absent with the body are present with the Lord.” David Brainerd is buried at the Northampton Cemetery in Northampton, Connecticut.

Sources used:

Edwards, Jonathan, ed. The Life and Diary of David Brainerd.

Christie, Vance. Heroes of the Faith – Into All the World: Four Stories of Pioneer Missionaries. Pages 9-54.

For one of my classes at SBTS, I am having to read (or in my case, re-read) J. Gresham Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism. It is a wonderful book and I am gaining much, this my second time through. In the second chapter, entitled “Doctrine,” Machen writes concerning Paul’s seemingly contradictory statements in Philippians and Galatians concerning the proclamation of the gospel:

The difference only concerned the logical - not even, perhaps, the temporal - order of three steps. Paul said that a man (1) first believes on Christ, (2) then is justified before God, (3) then immediately proceeds to keep God’s law. The Judaizers said that a man (1) believes on Christ and (2) keeps the law of God the best he can, and then (3) is justified.

This may seem like splitting hairs to the average person, but at place here is an explicit departure from God’s principles concerning our salvation and the life of the Christian.  We are not justified by believing on Christ AND keeping God’s law the best we can.  However, we are justified by believing on Christ and BECAUSE God granted us this wonderful salvation, we attempt to keep the law out of obedience to His commands and love for Him who saved us.

May we agree with Luther’s principle…We do not become righteous by doing righteous things.  Righteous people do righteous things because they have been made righteous by a righteous God.

I was reading a Spurgeon sermon this afternoon entitled, Paul’s First Prayer. It is a wonderful sermon, if you can find time to read it. I was particularly struck by Spurgeon’s opening paragraph:

God has many methods of quenching persecution.  He will not suffer His church to be injured by its enemies, or overwhelmed by its foes; and He is not short of means for turning asied the way of the wicked, or of turning it upside down.  In two ways He usually accomplished His end: sometimes by the confusion of the persecutor, and at others in a more blessed manner, by his conversion.  Sometimes, He conconfuses and confounds His enemies; He makes the diviner mad; He lets the man who comes against Him be utterly destroyed, suffers him to drive on his own detruction, and then at last turns round in triumphant derision upon the man who hoped to have said, “aha! aha!” to the church of God.  But at other times, as in this case, He converts the persecutor.  Thus, He transforms the foe into a friend; He makes the man who was a warrior against the gospel a soldier for it.  Out of darkness He bringeth forth light; out of the eater He getteth honey; yea, out of stony hearts He raiseth up children unto Abraham.

Thank God that He has turned us from His foe into His friend.  Thank God that He has taken me, a warrior against His gospel and made me, by His grace a soldier for it.

While on vacation, I have been reading a small volume of sermons printed by Funk & Wagnall’s entitled The World’s Greatest Sermons Volume I (Basil to Calvin). This series was printed in 1908 and to the best of my knowledge (I am on vacation away from my other books and the library) I think there are seven or eight volumes in this series and I think this series is out of print. As a fan of both church history and of sermon reading, this makes a perfect little book for vacation reading.

Another feature I like about this series is that at the beginning of each sermon, there is a brief biographical sketch of the preacher, usually concerning thoughts on preaching. Upon reaching Martin Luther’s sermon entitled The Method and Fruits of Justification, I encountered the following:

When I ascend the pulpit I see no heads, but imagine those that are before me to be all blocks. When I preach I sink myself deeply down; I regard neither doctors nor masters, of which there are no more than forty. But I have an eye to the multitude of young people, children, and servants, of which there are more than two thousand. I preach to them. When he preaches on any article, a man must first distinguish it, then define, describe, and show what it is; thirdly, he must produce two sentences from the Scripture to prove and to strengthen it; fourthly, he must explain it be examples; fifthly, he must adorn it with similitudes; and lastly, he must admonish and arouse the indolent, correct the disobedient, and reprove the authors of false doctrine.

Brothers, those who stand in pulpits, we must keep in mind what we are to do and who we are to preach to. We preach God’s Word, not ours; and we preach to those who must needs hear the gospel. We must sink ourselves and the way we communicate to a level that can be heard and understood. We must take God’s Word and give it to those within our voice. Admonish the indolent….correct the disobedient….and reprove the authors of false doctrine.

What a powerful Edwards sermon! God, The Best Portion of the Christian is a wonderful, and rather short for Edwards, sermon on God being the “chiefest” to use an old catechism word) pursuit of the Christian. This sermon is dated April 1735, a mere 271 years and a few months ago! It’s impact is indeed lasting. As a matter of fact, as I as reading this, I could almost vividly see this sermon’s impact on John Piper.

I am currently reading God is the Gospel, by John Piper, which I will review here on Gospel and Kingdom this coming week, and the similarities between this sermon and that book are striking! I will offer a few of the good quotes below and you will see what I am talking about.

• A godly man prefers God before anything else in heaven. And it is the temper of a godly man to prefer God before all other things on the earth.
• Now the main reason why the godly man hath his heart thus to heaven, is because God is there; that is the palace of the Most High.
• [Christians] would not with cheerfulness forsake all their earthly possessions, and all their earthly friends, as many thousands of them have done, and wander about in poverty and banishment, being destitute, afflicted, tortured, in hopes of exchanging their earthly for a heavenly inheritance, were it not that they hope to be with their glorious Redeemer and heavenly Father - The believer’s heart is in heaven, because that is where his treasure is.
• If God were not to be enjoyed in heaven, but only wealth, immense treasures of silver and gold, great honor of such kind as men obtain in this world, and a fulness of the greatest sensual delights and pleasures, all these things would not make up for the want of God and Christ, and the enjoyment of them there.
• The saints prefer what of God may be obtained in this life before all things in the world.
• The saints prefer what he hath already of God before any thing in this world. That which was infused into his heart at his conversion, is more precious to him than anything which the world can afford.
• He value’s the robe of Christ’s righteousness, which he hath on his soul, more than the robes of princes.
• But how great is the happiness of those who have chosen the Fountain of all good, who prefer him before all things in heaven or on earth, and who can never be deprived of Him for eternity!
• There is no sign of sincerity so much insisted on in the Bible as this, that we deny ourselves, sell all, forsake the world, take up the cross, and follow Christ whithersoever he goeth.

Amen!

As I said last week, Joe Harrod and I are reading through Jonathan Edwards’ The End for Which God Created the World in the month of June. We will be blogging our thoughts on our designated reading portion, and then commenting on each other’s posts. This is the first installment in a four part series during the month of June. I must note at the outset a few comments as to structure and sorts of that nature.

I am not reading this from my Works of Edwards, rather I am reading this from John Piper’s God’s Passion for His Glory. Any page or paragraph notations I may make in future posts will all come from there. Also, for those who have never read this book, it is perhaps one of the more difficult works of Jonathan Edwards to read. At least for me, anyway. So there may be some material that is vital to a reading of The End (this is how I may refer to this work in the future) which I may or may not comment on. If I do not, it is pretty much safe to say that I have not understood that section or I have not been able to process Edwards’ thought. Part of being a good reader is reading books beyond your current ability. The End is beyond my current ability, so this is a great exercises for me on many levels. I enjoy any dialog you may offer by way of comments. Especially if it is particularly helpful in furthering my understanding of this particular work. I think that about does it. Here we go!

In his introduction to The End, Jonathan Edwards posited eight positions. I will list these for you, although some of them may or may not make sense to you because they are not in their context. Most of them, however, should stand alone and make sense to you.

1. A subordinate end is never valued (as a chief end) above its own ultimate end.
2. A subordinate end may be equally valued with an ultimate end if it is necessary and sufficient to the ultimate end.
3. When there is only one ultimate end, it is chief above all other ends.
4. What we seek for its own sake is our “last” or “ultimate” end.
5. There is only one ultimate end when one thing only is sought on its own account.
6. The one “original” ultimate end of all creation governs all God’s works.
7. In the “highest sense” if God’s ultimate end in creation, this end is also the end of all his works of providence.
8. The ultimate end of providence in general is the ultimate end of creation.
9. There is only one ultimate end of creation if only one end is agreeable in itself.

Now what I gather from all of this that Edwards has written concerning these nine positions is this: while subordinate ends may be valued, only ultimate ends, or in the case I believe he is headed, the ultimate end, is valued supremely. The reason that God created the world, I think Edwards is going to say, is that end which we must apply our own selves to…ultimately. There may be subordinate ends that bring us happiness, but only the ultimate end will bring us joy.

I believe that Edwards sums that up in position eight when he says,

For though God may act for an end that is ultimate in a lower sense in some of His works of providence which is not the ultimate end of the creation of the world, yet this doth take place with regard to the works of providence in general; for God’s works of providence in general are the same with general use to which He puts the world He has made.

Now I know all of that is complicated, but I barely have a grasp of it myself and I think I would lose that grasp if I tried to put into words. For that reason, I stopped reading after the introduction this week for two reason: (1) it literally makes me physically tired to read this, and (2) I wanted some time to chew on that principle above before moving on. So I am taking a day off from Edwards and meditating on the goodness of God’s providence in creation and will pick it back up with renewed zeal next week.

Joe, I told you I may not make it through it all. I am sure you have made it farther than I have. What are you thoughts?

** You can view an online copy of Piper’s God’s Passion for His Glory here.

As part of my June reading, I have read this sermon by Jonathan Edwards entitled Hypocrites Deficient in the Duty of Prayer.  The text from which Edwards took this sermon is Job 27:10.  This is a very powerful sermon.  Its basic premise is, Edwards’ says, is to show, “How hyprocrites often continue for a season to a call upon God, how it is their manner, after a while, in a great measure to leave off the practice of this duty, and to give some reasons why this is a the manner of hypocrites.” 

Rather than summarizing the entire sermon in a “review,” as such, I will offer you some of my more favorite quotes from this sermon.  They are:

• Yea, they may continue in the duty of secret prayer for awhile after the liveliness of their affections is past, partly through the influence of their former intentions: They intended to continue seeking God always; and now suddenly to leave off, would therefore be too shocking to their own minds and partly through the force of their own preconceived notions, and what they have always believed, viz. That godly persons do continue in religion, and that their goodness is not like the morning cloud. Therefore, though they have no love to the duty of prayer, and begin to grow weary of it, yet as they love their own hope, they are somewhat backward to take a course, which will prove it to be a false hope, and so deprive them of it.
• They must not leave off suddenly, because that would be too great a shock to their false peace. But they must come gradually to it, as they find their consciences can bear it, and as they can find out devices and salvos to cover over the matter, and make their so doing consistent, in their own opinion, with the truth of their hope. 
• The true spirit of prayer is no other than God’s own Spirit dwelling in the hearts of the saints. And as this spirit comes from God, so doth it naturally tend to God in holy breathings and pantings. It naturally leads to God, to converse with him by prayer. Therefore the Spirit is said to make intercession for the saints with groanings which cannot be uttered, Rom. 8:26.
• To keep up the duty of prayer after he hath given loose to his lusts, would tend very much to disquiet a man’s conscience. It would give advantage to his conscience to testify aloud against him. If he should come from his wickedness into the presence of God, immediately to speak to him, his conscience would, as it were; fly in his face. Therefore hypocrites, as they by degrees  admit their wicked practices, exclude prayer.
• True love to God seeks to please God in every thing, and universally to conform to his will.
• How can you expect to dwell with God for ever, if you so neglect and forsake him here? This your practice shows, that you place not your happiness in God, in nearness to him, and communion with him. He Who refuses to come and visit, and converse with a friend, and who in a great measure forsakes him, when he is abundantly invited and importuned to come; plainly shows that he places not his happiness in, the company and conversation of that friend. Now, if this be the case with you respecting God, then how can you expect to have it for your happiness to all eternity, to be with God, and to enjoy holy communion with him?
• Consider the great benefit of a constant, diligent, and persevering attendance on this duty. It is one of the greatest and most excellent means of nourishing the new nature, and of causing the soul to flourish and prosper. It is an excellent mean of keeping up an acquaintance with God, and of growing in the knowledge of God. It is the way to a life of communion with God. It is an excellent mean of taking off the heart from the vanities of the world and of causing the mind to be conversant in heaven. It is an excellent preservative from sin and the wiles of the devil, and a powerful antidote against the poison of the old serpent. It is a duty whereby strength is derived from God against the lusts and corruptions of the heart, and the snares of the world.

On Monday, I posted my first blog entry pertaining to the 114 questions of the Baptist Catechism. I rather enjoyed the comments on that post and the discussion that we had. Specifically enjoyed the comments concerning “chiefest” versus the use of another word, such as “best” (as in Piper’s adaptation of the Baptist Catechism). I explained in the comment section of that post that I believed that the word “chiefest” was a better word concerning what I perceived the question/answer of the Baptist Catechism was trying to get across…..that God is Himself chief in all things.

Today being June 1, I have started reading Edwards for the month, as I have time. This morning I was reading The End for Which God Created the World and in paragraph seven, Edwards says this:

A chief end, which is opposite to an inferior end, is something diverse from an ultimate end; it is most valued, and therefore most sought after by the agent in what he does. It is evident that to be an end more valued than another end is not exactly the same thing as to be an end valued ultimately, or for its own sake.

Now I know that was a mouthful and I am not going to even attempt to explain the context of what Edwards is discussing in this post. However, what he says is pertinent to this discussion concerning whether or not “chiefest” is a better word than “best.” I believe, knowing what the framers of the Baptist Catechism were trying to accomplish, Edwards would say that chiefest is a more appropriate word.

Why would I say that? Based on his description or usage of the word chief end. The word best, for me, describes something that is best for me, here on this earth, in this life. Chiefest seems to describe something that is outside of myself. Which is exactly what I believe should be communicated through question one of the Baptist Catechism. God is the chiefest of beings, completely outside of this world, yet completely in it as He is its Creator. Who among heaven and earth is more “chiefer?” Gos is the chiefest being!

Mark Dever, on the T4G blog back in January had a very intriguing post regarding his "Canon of Theologians", or his "Reading Rotation."  For his posts regarding this matter, you may see them here and here.  Even at that time, in late January when he posted those articles, I knew I had to set up my own rotation.  There is so much that I want to read, yet I am so unstructured when it comes to approaching the task.

So I want to offer you my canon of theologians, or reading rotation.  As you will probably notice, it is very similar to Dever’s.  This is not because I am mimicking his list.  That is thoroughly NOT the case.  What is amazing is that all of these men, with the exception of Sibbes, I already posses their works, or can get to them, and these men I already admire so much.  So without further delay, here is my rotation:

• January: John Bunyan
• February:  John Owen
• March:  B.B. Warfield
• April:  Augustine
• May:  Richard Baxter
• June:  Jonathan Edwards
• July:  Early Church Fathers
• August:  C.H. Spurgeon
• September:  John Calvin
• October: Martin Luther
• November: C.S. Lews/Carl F.H. Henry
• December: John Stott/J.I. Packer/D.A. Carson

I hope that this will be beneficial to me.  I believe the organization and structure in approaching my "friends" will be a deliberate attempt to soak in all of their goodness.