Questions and Answers

If you would like to submit a question to the Pastor anonymously (if you desire) then click here.

Topics

How could Judas be appointed to preach the Gospel?               There are many sick people. Is God angry with us?             Does God answer the prayers of the unsaved?

God's care for His Church in the dark ages                                I cannot find the "total depravity" in me!                              How can you tell difference between heart and mind?

Women to be submissive.                                                         The Trinity                                                                          How do I get rid of an internet addiction?

Differences in Reformed Churches.                                           Conscience Issues                                                              Question about the "sermon given to a mother-in-law"

Hopelessness in Salvation                                                         Women's Clothing                                                              Why not to build an altar from hewn stone? 

Suitable dress sense                                                                 Tattoos                                                                               Difference between Samson and Muslim extremist?  

List of classic books                                                                 Humour                                                                              What is the background for the "leprosy laws"? 

The Love of God                                                                     Why Don't we know when we will die?                                How does a calling for the ministry come?

Why congregations?                                                                 How to deal with prejudices                                                Is it possible for a person like me to be saved?

Problems about the Lord's supper                                            Circumcision vs Baptism                                                      Election and God's promises 

How to put your mind on the Word of God.                             How do you know for sure that you are saved?                    Eating With Sinners 

The Salvation of infants or young children NEW!

 

Question: (1)

I have been reading through Paul's first epistle to Timothy, and have a couple of questions about some of the ideas Paul sets out. 1)1 timothy 2: Paul is writing about how the  women have to be submissive and modest etc. I understand all that, it's quite clear cut. But verses 13 to 15 don't make any sense, especially verse 15,  "notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing it they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."   Does that mean that to be saved you have to have children?  Because that would mean that unmarried or barren women couldn't be saved?

 (2) then in chapter 5 it is talking about widows re-marrying and how their age makes a difference. I was wondering if you could explain what he actually means, who does or doesn't get married and why, and also if that should still apply to us today. (after all we still keep to the clothing issue, women's authority, among others) so why is this not a common issue?

Answer

Hi Jane,

I am taking the time to answer your first question today and the other one a bit later.   I am glad that you are clear about the first part of Paul's instruction and I am not surprised that you have a few questions about the last verses in that chapter.  They look a little puzzling at first sight, don't they.  Obviously, Paul couldn't mean what you suggested in the last part of your question (do I need to have children in order to be saved).

The verses 13-15 are to be seen in connection of what goes before it.  Paul is building his case for his teaching in vs. 11-12.  He has you already so convinced that he could have omitted vs. 13-15!   But there might have been a few women in Ephesus who weren't agreeing that quickly.  So Paul made his case, as God's spokesman, of course.  There must be a reason why the women's place in the teaching position within the church was placed off-limit.

There are two unchangeable facts upon which this exclusion of the women in the teaching position is based.
1.  God's creation order.  God first made the male and after that the female as his helper.  In other words, he made man to lead and women to follow.  This tendency to follow was imbedded in the soul of Eve by the Creator as well the quality to lead in the soul of Adam.  This order God placed in His creation should not be reversed or encouraged to be reversed in the public roles of men and women in the public worship.  It is interesting to note that only when the woman recognizes this basic distinction and gladly accepts it as God's ordinance, that then she will be a real blessing to her husband and even will have the beautiful task of shaping and helping her husband in his task of leadership.  Without the wife's involvement, a man or husband couldn't do his task well.  That doesn't mean that unmarried people are failures or won't be able to fulfill a meaningful role in life.  Yet, it is undeniable that there is something missing as also is keenly felt;  it was even experienced by Adam before the Fall as he doing God's task of naming the animals.  For I am sure that not only God remarked that it wasn't good for man to be alone but that He also caused Adam to feel that as he completed God's task of naming the animals.

2) The fall of Eve.  After having described this original creation order, Paul goes on to show what happened when Eve rebelled against this order for her to "follow" and instead began to "give leadership."   Her fall into sin occurred because she ignored her divinely ordained position.  She chose to lead Adam and she promptly led him into sin.  The first statement "Adam was not deceived" isn't meant absolutely.  In some way Adam was also deceived but he wasn't deceived like Eve was.  Adam, as a leader with whom God had made the covenant of works, knew full well what he was doing but choose to follow his wife who had overstepped her position at that point.   What before was a blessing (i.e. to follow a sinless husband) now is no longer a blessing.  As one said, "Now she has to obey the creature of her own designing, a sinful husband."  Paul is arguing from this fall that the women should not seek to reverse or ignore the order of God as established in creation within the church context.  It created huge problems then and it will do so now as well. So let's continue to obey this Divine order.

In the last verse Paul is still making his case to the women that they should aspire to teaching position within the church.  It will not be a way to happiness and neither will it be the way to be most useful or successful as a woman.  A woman will not attain to real happiness by forcing herself into a position that God didn't make her for but by assuming the position and pursuing the task that God has created her for.  If she may continue to live in the life of faith, love and holiness as a woman or wife, taking her position and devoting herself to the task God has called women for (childbearing and child-rearing), then this will not hinder her salvation.  Sometimes super busy moms have hardly time to do anything else but caring for their busy and demanding families and they may feel they miss out so much.  Yet God encourages even the "stay-home" mothers that if they pursue their task as women, this will never hinder their personal salvation.
The path of obedience is always the way to blessing.  Therefore the best way for a woman to feel useful and even experience the joy of "leading" (because that is joyful and privileged task) is by "leading" their children to the Lord in their daily walk and talk at home.  God has given women the task to "teach" future men from the "bottom up."  In other ways, by means of the upbringing of the child or children that she may bear, she can be greatly used for the prospering of God's kingdom. Let no mother think that they are "burying their talents" when they devote themselves to the bringing of their children, the keeping and managing of the "home-base" (family) and creating the "harbor of safety and nurture" each home is to be.  That's where the men, as they lead and combat for their families, is to be able to return to and from there they are to be able to go forth again in the task God assigned them.  Perhaps you may think that this is "demeaning" the women's value.  Far from it.  Read Prov. 31 and observe what a multi-sided and influential woman this virtuous woman is.  There is nothing wasted when the woman devotes herself to her husband and family.  What a school also is the family life to our personal life!  A busy mother I know once shared an interesting thought on this verse: being a full-time mom of a large family had certainly made her feel her selfishness, rebelliousness, etc. That made her feel the need for the salvation of Jesus Christ more than anything.  So God used her daily family problems and demands as a way to teach her spiritually.  I don't think that's exactly what Paul had in mind but it is true.

In the context of the question, it doesn't fit to dwell upon the husband's task and his absolute vital role in making his wife or woman feel valued and important.  Prov. 31 woman is an ideal picture; no man is will find such a woman!  Indeed, they only become that way by the loving ministry of husbands.   But that falls outside the scope of your question.
For time sake, you need to wait for the second half of the question.  Thanks for your patience.

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question(2):

Where I grew up, there was an NRC, CRC, FRC, Canadian Reformed, Reformed Church of North America, etc. A LOT (not all)of people from the NRC would not step foot inside any of those other reformed churches because they believed they were all easy-believers. Each of those reformed churches uses the exact same catechism and essentially believes the same things. However, there is a different emphasis in each church. It is true that the CRC, for example, believes it is ‘easier' to be saved than the NRC; however, they do NOT believe that they are going to heaven because they are good people. They believe that they need to be converted (although that word is not commonly used in the other churches). They believe that they need to accept that they are sinners, that they need a saviour, and that Jesus died for their sin if they will accept that. The difference comes that they are more willing to accept it than the NRC people are - the NRC sees this as easy-believism and that is what is extremely confusing to non-NRCers. Non-NRCers believe that we have a responsibility and the ability to make a choice (just like Adam & Eve did). The NRC also will say that we have a responsibility, but that is where I get confused because I not sure what the responsibility is if we don't have a choice? As I read through the new Testament, I don't know of any stories where Jesus left somebody confused about whether or not they were saved and yet I know many NRC folk who are just that. Or they just decide they aren't but they're going to keep going to church because maybe God will speak to them one day? Maybe you could clear up some of my confusion.

Answer

Dear confused friend,

 It is easy to get confused about the many different churches which in theory all hold to the same doctrinal statements (such as the Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession and Canons of Dort).  Still there are subtle or great differences between the churches’ emphasis or application of those doctrines;  too many to discuss in the scope of this article.  As you indicated in your question, we do easily stereotype certain churches and put labels on them that aren’t always accurate.  When you then confront or discuss those finer points of doctrine with the members of those particular churches, you will discover what you have discovered, i.e. that the differences aren’t quite that easy to pinpoint in some of the denominations that are standing quite close to us.

 My intention isn’t to answer the statements you made about the extent of the differences between the churches but focus on the heart of your question: what is our responsibility with regard to salvation?  I agree that many are very confused and your analysis of “that they just decided to keep going to church with the hope that God will speak to them one day” is to the point.

 Our responsibility is to repent from the sins God identifies through His Word and believe in His message that He will abundantly pardon us when we return to Him.  (Is. 55:7; Mark 1:15;  Acts 13:21) (Did you look up those verses?  If not, do that first!)

 There are thousands of sins in our life we don’t even see or feel but God declares His utter displeasure and anger about them in His Word.  Also in your life He sees day and even at night sins and sins.  Sin is transgression of His holy standards and He is “angry with the sinner every day” (Ps. 7:11)  As God points these sins out in His Word (and I assume you are reading His Word every day not just for information; conscience soothing but for listening to what He is saying about you and to you!).  When we see those sins what does God require from us to do?   He expects us to get on our knees and to confess those sins to Him.  If we don’t feel our sins, He expects us to be on our knees begging Him to show us our sins, “that which I see not teach thou me;  if I have done iniquity, I will do no more.” (Job 34:32)   Simply because we are dead in sin, blind for sin, deaf to His voice, doesn’t mean we are “off the hook.”  It condemns us that we are like that: insensitive to this great and holy God!

 The moment I see sin to be sin, I need to get back to God in confession and seeking for His pardon on all those sins.  Do you ever come out of church condemned by the Word you heard?  How foolish to ignore such a summon by the Judge!  You would declare those people a fool who ignore the flashing lights behind them as they have broken the traffic laws!  They won’t escape by ignoring it.  Or those people who refuse to come to court when they are summoned to do so. They only make things worse.  Yet that’s how we are all the time when it comes to God.  Yes, some people say, I haven’t felt it deep enough and therefore I don’t think I need to respond.  How foolish is such a response!

 Our “respond-ibility” is to respond to God’s call as Judge and turn ourselves in before His throne as the guilty one.  Each time we feel our conscience speak;  each time the Word condemns us … each time!  Even if it a hundred times a day! (Luke 17:1-4)  Delaying returning will only make it worse.  When the prodigal son came to himself, would it have helped him to delay to return to his father?  No, he resolved to return and did return in confession (he even rehearsed it all the way). That’s exactly what David did in Ps. 32:5.  When God brought home his sin (which he trying hard to ignore for a while) he resolved “I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD.”  (Ps. 32:5)  He didn’t only resolve it;  he did do it.  In Ps. 51 he has recorded how he did it.  I have used that Psalm countless times to confess my sins to God again and again.

 But God doesn’t only bring the message of the Law to us!  He also extends a personal golden scepter to us that He is “a gracious God, ready to pardon.” (Ps. 86:5)  It is impossible to believe without God’s divine aid that this is true.  To think that God is “ready to pardon” me, after I have sinned so enormously over and over!  Yet He is and He declares it over and over to us in His holy Scriptures.  He has written it personally on your forehead when you were baptized:  I am the GRACE-GOD and I promise you that if you will return in the way of repentance and faith I will abundantly pardon you.   Multitudes of people struggle to believe this;  they conclude that God is only willing to pardon “good people or His people.”  For sure, God speaks about His people in the Scripture but in the general call of the Gospel He extends to every hearer of the Gospel in this world His golden scepter of pardoning love. 

 Many people think they have somehow to overcome God’s unwillingness to save them so they work hard, try to do better, be humbler and holier etc.  But isn’t grace sovereign?  Sovereign means that He didn’t take either merit or demerit in consideration when He declared I will be merciful to whom I will be merciful.  (Rom. 9)  Friend, God is speaking to us in His Word and through the preaching of the Word every time when you read it or hear it.  And He is saying, “Return, oh children of men, return!”   Deep down many people think that God is somehow “hostile” to them and therefore they have to win Him over.  The thought is blasphemous!  It our unwillingness and hostility that is the problem.  As He calls us and assures us in Is. 55 that when we return to Him and will abundantly pardon, do you think He means it? 

 The prodigal son didn’t know his father when he thought that he could never be son again and therefore begged to be “servant.”  In that parable the Lord Jesus exposes exactly our darkness of understanding about God!  We don’t know God either and can’t believe that He would pardon and reinstate us into the very position as sons and daughters we once enjoyed before that dreaded Fall in Paradise. 

 Our responsibility is therefore not only to repent but to “believe the Gospel message.”  And what is that message:  that He will abundantly and instantly pardon all my sins when I may exercise trust in Him.  John wrote, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9)  God requires us to act as He acts.  When someone comes to us in repentance, we are to forgive him, even if he comes seven times a day. (Luke 17:3-4).  So He will also forgive even if we come seven times a day.  The disciples couldn’t believe that and therefore asked, “Lord increase our faith.” (Luke 17:5) 

 Too many people who struggle under the burden of their sin;  under the sense of the separation from God’s favor;  under the condemning sentence of His holy law linger and linger before they respond to God’s call of grace.  Why?  Ultimately it because of unbelief in the message that He is really ready to pardon them!

 You mentioned that “many people come to church hoping that God would speak to them one day.”  I hope you are not one of those but let me assure you, the Lord is speaking to you each time you are in the house of God.  He speaks through His servants and we are called to “hear what the Spirit saith to the churches.”   Never walk out of church again thinking that God didn’t speak to you.  Instead ask “Now what did He speak to me about this morning?”   Never close your Bible saying, “It wasn’t for me; there is nothing in there for me.”  You may not have heard it but He spoke and spoke to you!

 Our responsibility in no way implies your ability;  neither does your inability to respond favorably to God’s law and Gospel in any sense diminish you responsibility.  Instead, focus on your responsibility while you confess and bemoan your inability.  A church is erring when they teach that we have the ability to respond to God.  But a church is as much in error when it diminishes our responsibility!   God grant that the sharp edge of His Word is never blunted in your church by a vain appeal to God’s sovereignty.  The Lord is holy and just and righteously maintain His demands.

 Warmly, Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question(3) 

I thank you and your church for having a website to visit.  I wish more of our churches had this. Could you please answer a question for me that has been on my mind much of the time lately?  I have been struggling with it a lot.  If a person has noticed a continual change in his/her life, without having a feeling of absolute hopelessness first and such a deep deep sense of misery, can that person still be saved?  I must admit, I cannot feel hopeless, because there is ALWAYS hope in Jesus Christ.  However, what is preached in the church is that you first have to come to a place of complete and utter hopelessness first, and THEN you can be saved. Could you please give me your insight on this? Thank you so much and all the best in the New Year to you. 

Answer

Hi Michelle,

Thank you for your encouragement about the website.  It has been a great means of communicating and also answering questions.  I also wish you a blessed New Year.  May you experience the personal grace of God in your life.

 Your question is not an uncommon one.   I struggled with the exact same issue many years ago.   I assume you will agree that without a real conviction of sin no one will really become interested in salvation in Christ.  It is not until I feel sick that I am paying attention to notices about capable and willing doctors.   Therefore it is correct to say that no one will seek for salvation who hasn’t first been somehow convicted of his or her sins.  In our natural and fallen state we are actually indifferent to the sinfulness of our sins and the dangers of sins.  Thus the teaching of your church is correct if they teach that a sense of conviction and misery about who you are and where you are in relationship to God is experienced prior to the knowledge and experience of salvation through Jesus Christ. 

 Will everyone sense a complete “hopelessness” before they come to a measure of hope by faith in the Gospel message of the Lord Jesus?  That really is the heart of your question.  I rely in my answer on the helpful book The Way of Life by Charles Hodge. I highly recommend that book. His chapter on “conviction of sin” is extremely good and helpful. Conviction of sin includes several aspects.  First, God’s Spirit works a deepening knowledge of the nature of sin and the extent of our sinfulness.  How much of this is necessary:  enough to bring our hearts to consent to God’s declaration about our guilt and His justice in punishing us.  Secondly, along with this conviction, comes a deepening sense of our personal unworthiness.  This sense of personal unworthiness is the main part of someone’s real conviction of sin.  A sense of shame is sensed; along with sorrow about all the offences we have committed.  There will also be a fear, a dread that we have offended God as well as a fear that we will not be forgiven.  Think of how Job put it, “The arrows of the Almighty are within me…”   It is interesting to see that no matter how many years apart such convicted sinners have lived, they all express themselves similarly before God.   However, be careful to think that such conviction is salvation.  It only will make us more ready to receive what God has been telling us all along and we weren’t interested in but in itself it doesn’t save us. Only true faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is saving. Thirdly, conviction of sin includes a conviction of our condemnation before God.   Along with this conviction often the feeling is felt that our sins are so great that they cannot be forgiven.   Indeed, when there is a clear discovery of sin and guilt, without an understanding of the plan of salvation, despair is felt.   When someone sees God as just in condemning a sinner and when that someone sees himself as a condemnable sinner, than he or she cannot hope for mercy.   A sense of despair or hopelessness is experienced.   I like to quote, however, a paragraph that might help you.

 In a Christian country, however, the knowledge of the plan of salvation is so generally diffused, that is seldom fails, even when imperfectly understood, to calm or restrain the apprehensions of God’s displeasure.  It is known that God can pardon sin; that there is salvation at least for some, for some have been saved.  And although the sinner is often disposed to think that his is an exceptional case, or that there is some peculiar aggravation in his guilt, which puts him beyond the reach of mercy, yet he cannot be sure that this is the case.  And in his darkest hours the belief in the possibility of salvation is not entirely destroyed.

 I agree with him.  Those who have been raised all their life under the message of the Gospel; who have heard over and over that there is forgiveness; that God is the God of Manasseh etc. will always know in the back of their mind that God is a God of love and pardon; that he who forsakes his sins and thoughts and return to Him, He shall abundantly pardon.   I vividly remember to sense that “I stood outside everything – had no right to anything but His holy and just displeasure – He would do no wrong if He passed me by with His grace – that I was no more than a dead dog etc.” yet never could I let go of that truth in Ps. 130 … but there is forgiveness!  That truth always drew me back to Him Who I felt I had deeply offended and wronged.  

 I hope this answers your particular question.  Feel free to react to this if you have more questions.

 Warmly, Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question(4) 

Hi..  I have a colleague who is getting married next year.  She is having problems finding a suitable dress, because from her church she is not allowed to wear white, and she has to wear a hat, not a veil.  She can't wear cream either, or any light colour.  I was wondering what your position on this is?  I realize that white is a sign or symbol of purity, and that no-one is pure. But if it's not ok to wear white on our wedding day, then why is it ok to wear white any other day?  And what is the difference between a hat and a veil?  they are both coverings for the head. If anything, I think a veil is better, the Israelites never wore hats! What do you think?

Answer

Hi ,
You are asking for my position on the colour of the wedding dress.  I have no difficulty with a white dress as it is fitting the occasion of the wedding.  Of course, someone could argue that nobody is pure and therefore nobody should wear white but that's an endless discussion that goes nowhere.  The colour of clothing, or even clothing itself, was never meant to be an expression of one's standing before God. The choice of  colour is also somewhat culturally dictated.  What is acceptable in one culture isn't in another.  In our Western culture, white has been the traditional colour for weddings and black for funerals.  God never dictated  a colour of clothing in the Bible. Of course, as the Bible is written in the culture of those days, you will also find reflected their culture in the Scriptures.  We would think it `quite` inappropriate to swaddle babies at their birth.  Yet is was very common in the Bible culture.  Also, people wailing around the funeral procession would be frowned upon in the Netherlands;  yet it would be frowned upon if missed in the Bible times.  The Bible's principles about clothing are in brief 1) concealing rather than revealing (that's also true for wedding dresses and true for males and females)  2) sober rather than extraordinary (clothing is a badge of our fallen condition)  3) fitting the occasion (sackcloth wasn't usually worn to a wedding feast!)  4) sex distinguished (there need to be difference between male and females expressed in clothing)  5) subject to the law of charity (don't offend your weaker brother with your liberty).  Colour is never dictated anywhere.  The reference to "zwart" in Ps. 42 is a reference to mourning, grief rather than to the exact color. Therefore I don't think I agree at all with the position that brides have to be in black or dark clothing.  However, I would respect it if that is an important issue within that particular church your friend hopes to be married in.  Rom. 14 tells me that I need to deny my liberty and in this case, your friend would do wrong if in that church she would provoke brothers and sisters to anger with pursuing her liberty in this matter. If she doesn't want to conform, she should find another church where God's truth is preached and where this colour of the dress isn't an issue.

Regarding the head covering.  That's not a cultural issue but clearly a part of the expression of obedience to God's order of creation as reflected also in the church setting.  Study 1 Cor. 11 (there has been an excellent series of articles about this in the NRC Banner of Truth by Rev. Sonneveldt during 2007).  My opinion is that the head coverings in our churches have in general become a fashion item.  The simplicity is gone and, I am afraid, for many it hardly an expression of faith and obedience to God;  rather a form.  Indeed, in Scripture they used a veil which was a sort of "hoofd-doek."  I am not sure but we must not imagine them to be the ones you see enforced in the strict Muslim world.   It is curious that on the wedding we still see the veil on the bride even though even that one isn't quite like in the Bible times but it tries to reflect that somewhat.  You are asking for my opinion.  It doesn't matter to me as long as the head is a covering, non-provocative, affordable and modest. All these things are outward things. The most important part of the wedding is not the clothing of the bride but the spiritual attitude of the both the bridegroom and bride.  Let's not forget that we are seeking the Lord's blessing on our marriage when we gather together in church.  Let there be preparation for that as well.

Sincerely,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question(5)

In regards to your sermon on “Discipline on Learning", you mentioned “religious classic" books, can I get a list of these books?

Answer

Hi,
I went through the shelves of my library to select a few of the "religious classics." Some are harder to read than others but with practice, any sound mind should be able to master reading the Puritan authors.  Here is suggested list.

- Archibald Alexander: Religious Affections

            ♦ very useful book in speaking to the many questions surrounding the spiritual
               struggles and variety of leading in the life of grace;  very readable with useful
               anecdotal illustrations.

- Joseph Alleine, Alarm to the Unconverted

            ♦ Alleine really pressed the point that we shouldn’t delay coming to Christ

- Isaac Ambrose: Looking unto Jesus

            ♦ a precious volume of mediations about the work of Christ and how it should

               affect us;  a gem for daily devotion

- Horatius Bonar: The Way of Peace and The Way of Holiness

            ♦ both volumes ought to be read for the balance of the whole truth

- Brakel: The Reasonable Service (4 vol.)

            ♦ Brakel’s systematic theology is unique in that it masterfully makes the doctrines
               of Scripture spiritual nourishment. Not every part of each chapter needs to be
               read by the layman as Brakel also wrote to instruct instructors.  He spent pages
               on defending certain doctrines, exposing errors and answering objections. That
               can be tedious and can be skipped if you are looking for spiritual instruction of
               your soul.

- Thomas Brooks: A Poor Doubting Christian Drawn to Christ

            ♦ precious remedy for a fearful soul seeking for salvation

- Thomas Boston:  Human Nature in Its Fourfold State and Beauties of Boston
            ♦ both excellent;  the “Beauties” is the cream of his writings; highly recommended

- John Bunyan: Pilgrim’s Progress;  Come and Welcome to Jesus Christ; etc.

            ♦ any of John Bunyan’s writings are good;  John Owen heard him preach and would gladly
                give all his learning to preach like John Bunyan.  His grasp of Scripture is superb.  

- John Calvin: Institutes of Christian Religion

            ♦ This book looks impressive but is surprisingly readable.  It is a gem and well worth your effort.

- Jonathan Edwards: His Collected Works; Religious Affections

             ♦ Edwards is a challenge to read but well worth any effort

- John Flavel: The Fountain of Life, Method of Grace, Christ Knocking

            ♦ Flavel is easy to read;  his collected works are well worth searching.

- William Guthrie: The Christian’s Great Interest

            ♦ beautiful book in explaining God varied ways in leading His people to salvation

- John Owen: The Forgiveness of Sin

            ♦ Mostly rooted in Ps. 130, this book sets forth so much beautiful Gospel teaching
                and sheds tremendous light upon the way of the Gospel.

 - A. Pink: The Attributes of God

            ♦ Though Pink isn’t an official “old father” his writings are searching and meaty. 
               I found his book on God very refreshing and challenging.

- J. C. Ryle: New Birth; Holiness;  Expository Thoughts on the Gospels;  Old Paths
            ♦ J. C. Ryle had the gift of writing simply about great and important truths. If you
                are not much of a reader, begin with Ryle.   His expository thoughts make
                wonderful daily devotion in the family circle

- Thomas Watson: Heaven Taken by Storm

            ♦ This book is a powerful exhortation to seek the Lord.  Anything of Watson is
                well worth reading.  He is one of the easier Puritans to read as his sentences
                tend to be shorter than some of his fellow brothers.  I love his Body of Divinity. 
                It is “catechism style” book covering the whole of truth with question and
                answers, many of them very pastoral and experiential.
      
Well, this is for a starter.  May God bless the reading to your heart. Warmly, Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question(6)

Just was wondering after your sermon on the love of God, how can he, being such a loving God, let so much misery be in the world, i.e.: child abuse. B/c these children are brought into this world as victims of abuse... living with it all their lives? Also if God loves everyone. How can this love flow over to these abusers?

Answer

Dear friend,
What a tough question you asked! Still, I understand these questions. They come up in my heart also. There are many things that "don't seem fair" in this life. You mentioned one little aspect (though not at all a little issue) of the many aspects where such like questions can be stirred up. The list is endless (hungering children, dying of AIDS, living and dying without hearing the Gospel etc.). Naturally, when we look at these things from our "human perspective" then the question you asked seem so right. Years ago someone asked the question from the other side: how come there is so much good in this world? Let's face it, in many lives the good outweighs the evil things in life (or did I grow up in too limited a circle!?) Yet nobody seems to sincerely question that aspect of our reality but almost take it for granted. However, in the light of the sin and rebellion which fills this world, isn't that actually a greater wonder. I know that doesn't really answer the question as yet, but it does bring in another angle to the our thinking. The Lord's tender mercies are multiplied to such a larger extent than His acts of justice in this life. The prophet Habakkuk begged the Lord to "remember mercy in His wrath." (Hab. 3:2) The Lord is doing that. His acts of mercies outweigh His acts of righteous and holy displeasure. He is a long-suffering God which means that He, humanly speaking, will suffers long before He acts. God doesn't love "abusers" or even "sinners" but He loves His creatures. That sounds like the same and yet I think it is different. He hates sin; is angry with the sinner everyday and will punish any sinner who doesn't repent from his or her sin with punishment, in this life and the after-this-life. Still He cares and loves in His general love all His creatures. I can be livid with my child when he or she does something abominable yet I love my child intensely though I will never approve or condone bad behavior. I will punish it severely if it is necessary. The Almighty acts like this in perfection where we as humans may ultimately totally fail as sometimes parents can't say anymore that they love their own misbehaving or rebellious children.

When it comes to all the suffering, and especially such suffering which is imposed by adults upon children or those in power pon the weak and poor, it is easy to question God's ways. Why would He allow an adult to mess up a boy or girl through sexual abuse? Indeed, such an abused person often is too weak to resist perpetual abuse and even may marry an abuser or become an abuser. The cycle seems so endless and the question so natural, "Why doesn't the Lord of love stop this or prevent this?"

Is it because He is justly punishing this creation for rejecting Him? We tend to forget that this world is cursed because of our rebellion in Paradise. We are living in a world which *we *have destroyed and we continue to destroy through sin. God's judgments are revealed against sin and one way His anger is revealed is that He allows people to sin. In Romans 1:18ff Paul indicates that the Roman society is so lewd and evil because God gave them over to do such things after they have rejected the obvious. It is His act of justice gives a society over like this. So ultimately we are to be blamed for causing our own problems. Our sins also affect our children and those around us. Does that mean that He is neutral to such actions? Far from it! His displeasure and His anger will be felt by those who have committed sin and in His way He will visit their iniquities upon them. If not in this life, it will be in the after-this-life.

God sometimes allows sins to bring out a greater good. He permitted Adam and Eve by His decree to sin. Yet it formed the occasion for Him to reveal His greatest glory in the love of the gift of His Son. Could He have thought out a different way? Paul confronted such reasoning or questions with "Nay but, O man, who are thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?" (Romans 9:20) God can use the terrible pain of abuse to bring a person to Himself. I know a few cases where such pain has been blessed spiritually. Without pain we will ignore the dangers we are in and isn't that also true spiritually. In no way does that make the evil of abuse any less; never must we lean toward minimizing the evil of certain deeds by the good that comes out of it. Yet there are people who "bless the Lord for the affliction He send them or allowed to take place" for it was His way of teaching them.Your last question isn't very clear (How can this love flow over to these abusers?). I assume you meant "How are we to show love to these abusers?" then my answer is by 1) confronting them with their horrific sins (Luke 17:3) and 2) if he or she repents, we need to show forgiveness in word and deed. God pardons sinners and put their sin away. He will never forget it but He doesn't dwell on it anymore; He cast those sins into the ocean of His love. It is very difficult for us to do that, especially in cases of abuse. Still, the only way to heal the abuser is to lead him or her to the cross and to show that love in our own actions. Many abused continue to harbor hatred and anger. Does that help? It continues "abuse" in a different form and makes for bitterness. It doesn't resolve anything. Therefore the Lord directs us in His Scripture to deal with it and to pray for the exercise of love. These are some of the initial thoughts I like to share upon your questions. Feel free to respond with other questions.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question(7)

I saw that the name is Reformed Congregations (plural) know that there is a church in Carterton. My question is: are there also other congregations in New Zealand within this denomination? Do you try to start up something else? Mark

Answer

Answer: Hi Mark, You observed this very well.  About 25+ years ago, when they decided on the name of this church, it was decided to put into the plural as an expression of the faith that the Lord would use this congregation as a means to plant other like-minded church fellowships within NZ.  To this date that hasn't happened but we recently we have had a survey within our congregation and a good follow-up discussion about this.  As a congregation we are convinced that there is need for us to evangelize and have given that a form in various ways.   One of the suggestions at the meeting was to schedule a Sunday service in an area, advertise it and lead a worship service to see if there is any interest.  Personally I don't think that is the most effective way but I am willing to try this.  Perhaps in the future several of our families can be nucleus of a new fellowship in a certain area; or we can actually support someone to do church planting work as an evangelist.
I hope this answers your question.  Have a wonderful day! Pastor Arnoud Vergunst

Top

 

Question(8)

In my church we had Lord's Supper recently.  Usually I wear a sober dress and straw colour hat.  As I was preparing for the Lord's Supper, I was thinking about the expectation there is in our congregation to wear black, especially when we attend the Lord's Supper.  I decided not to because the Lord's Supper isn't a sad but joyous occasion.  Still, someone afterwards made a nice comment about it to me and pointed out from a Dutch book that we should wear black during the Lord's Supper celebration.  What are your thoughts about this?

Answer

I don't personally know what the reason is that our Dutch fore-fathers stressed the necessity of black. In one of the Dutch Psalms it uses the word "black" where our English uses "mourning."  Ps. 42:9 "Why go I mourning (Dutch, black) because of the oppression of the enemy?"  Perhaps that is the Scripture background of their emphasis on black.  Black is my least favorite colour!  Yet that's what we are expected to wear since it is a colour of dignity which to some extent is so even in the general public's eye.

Does that mean, however, that we need to wear "black" as believers, especially at the occasion of a joy?  For you are right that the Lord's Supper is the pre-marriage supper.  The Puritans referred to it as the "engagement meal" of Christ and His people.  That is an occasion of joy;  not a funeral or a time of mourning.  Therefore I don't agree that we need to wear black at the Lord's Supper as if we are to emphasize that we are mourning.  The death of the Lord Jesus is a cause of joy, rather than grief.  Our sins are the reason we need to mourn but isn't the Lord's Supper emphasizing the forgiveness of these sins?  Isn't that an occasion of joy? The joy I am speaking about it not a trivial or jovial joy;  it is the spiritual joy which flows from feasting on the truth that He gave His life for my sins and also that He is committed to love me in spite of all my shortcomings. That's no reason to hang down the head but to "be glad, ye righteous, and shout for joy, all ye that are upright in heart" (Ps. 32:11).

Therefore it is not necessary to change your hat to black when it comes to the Lord's Supper time.  Isn't every church service "holy" as we are in the presence of God and His angels?  Is the Lord Jesus "nearer" in the service where the sacrament is administered than in the service where it is not?   Do we also wear a black hat when it is baptism?  The answer is obvious.  He uses the sacraments to visibly display what He audibly makes known through the preaching.  Therefore I find it objectionable when people change their clothing habits when it comes to the Lord's Supper.  I know that people don't mean it hypocritically but for "outsiders" it does seem like that.  It can also contributes to an unhealthy spiritualism surrounding the Lord's Supper which often becomes a hindrance in the celebration of the truths which are there displayed and sealed.

That doesn't mean to say that we shouldn't have "Sunday clothing."   Farmers wear overalls on the farm; police have their uniform for their job.  We don't wear a three-piece suite when we go on a hike.  Each occasion has its own appropriate clothing.  Therefore I think we need to emphasize that a church service calls for appropriate clothing which shows respect, an understanding of the sacred nature of the place and being in God's presence.  When we visit an important person, we clothe for the occasion; therefore when we meet God in His house, we also are to meet for the occasion.  Your choice of clothing, however, doesn't need to change from the "regular" Sunday when it the Lord's Supper.  It should be appropriate each church service.

The principle which you are to live by is also charity.  When people are offended at your "freedom or liberty" Rom. 14 instructs us how we are to act.  What you did was in my opinion not wrong but if many people are going to be upset about this, you are to restrain your freedom and not to offend them.  So you might want to ask a few other people within the fellowship on how they felt about. If people do think you did something wrong, then be patient with these "weak believers" (as Rom. 14 refers to them) and gently instruct them in the right principles.

I hope that this answers your question somewhat.  Thanks for you question.
Warmly, Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question (9)

Hello there, I have been struggling lately with the trinity doctrine. I realize that this makes me a heretic but I have lost faith in it almost completely. I know vaguely about the history of his rather large controversy and I can't quite understand something. The Athanasian Creed states; Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;  which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved. Please, if you would, explain to me from your point of view why the belief that Jesus is God' is necessary for salvation when from my perspective belief that Jesus is God Son is enough. He still has been vested with all power and authority in heaven and earth. (that is except over the one who vested Him such powers) as the scripture states  "The head of every woman is the man, and the head of every man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God (the Father).' If he truly has all authority who is able to stop Him saving one who believes that his is the messiah, The final revelation of the Father, the Son. Yet still preserves for the Father a separate and Higher and the only  true eternal existence? (The word 'one' meaning in this context  only that Jesus represents his Father perfectly in Thought and Word and Deed.
 

Answer

 Dear friend,

Struggling with understanding the Trinity ... that' nothing too  uncommon!  Augustine, one of the greatest Bible students, wrote a long row of books about this subject, probably more complicated that God Himself wrote about it in the Bible.  At the end of the study, he still didn't understand it.  One day, as goes the story, he walked along the beach and saw a little boy walking with a small cup from the ocean to a little hole he had dug.  Augustine, observing the lad, asked him, "What are you doing?"  He answered, 'I am emptying the ocean into my little hole!"  Augustine took that as an answer on a different issue.  Never are we able to comprehend the things of God with our little puny minds.
The subject of the Trinity is not something God expects us to understand.  He knows that is beyond our comprehension. I also don't understand how God existed for always.  Or how He could make a material universe out of nothing.  Or how He could so love that He sacrificed Himself in His Son for enemies and attempted murderers of Himself.  The list goes on.  We aren't able to understand these things.  Let's acknowledge that and let the thought liberate you and me that we also aren't asked to understand it. That doesn't mean we can't talk or think about it.  To have an inquiring mind is healthy;  to think beyond what you know is stimulating for that's how you learn more.

Yet God ask us to believe in what He has revealed to us.  He asks us to believe His explanation about the origin of the world.  He created it, He said.  We can't prove that although there are enough evidences to support this revelation of God.  Search on your internet to "creation international" or Creation Research Institute" and enjoy learning about those evidences.  Yet, no one can fully comprehend it even thought God's fingerprints are everywhere to be found.  From a "detective viewpoint" nothing is easier to prove that "God has had His hand in the every aspect of the creation (design, order, beauty, organization etc.)."With the Trinity it gets more difficult because it deals with the Person of God Himself.  Creation is His work, something we can see and relate to; even explore or research.  With the Trinity you can't do that.  However,  there are some theologians-scientists who find evidences within Creation of the Trinity.  The universe, so they say is composed of a trinity: past, present, future;  matter is composed of a trinity: solid, liquid, gas;  space is measured with height, breath and depth.  Take those thoughts for information. I find it difficult to use them to support the "personalness" of the Divine Being, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Yet, the Bible clearly teaches the Trinity.  There are enough resources available for you to find out where and how the Bible teaches about the Trinity.  That's wasn't so much your question.  I take your question to be, "Why is it necessary to believe in the Trinity for me to be saved? "  Your quote of the Athanasian Creed is significant.  A person needs to believe in a personal Father, Son and Holy Ghost, three distinct Persons in the one God.  One reason for stating this is that evidently Jesus Himself believed in the Trinity!  Unless you can disprove from the Gospel records, especially from John, that Jesus Christ Himself didn't think that the Son was equal to the Father as a personal God as well as  His clear faith in the "another" (a different One though similar) Comforter, the Holy Ghost, then you might have a point.  Rarely do I see this question discussed from this angle.  Jesus spoke as the Son of God, Whom He claimed to be and for which assumption He was finally condemned to die because it was considered blasphemy.  Yet He spoke about His Father and Him sending forth the Holy Spirit to this earth.  He equalled His Father and His love; His Father's sovereign right to judge and He confessed His own sovereign right to judge.  From those statements and assertions I can only make one conclusion:  Jesus Himself clearly considered the Father and Son as two distinct Persons and later clearly revealed the third Person of the Trinity.  That forms then enough foundation to require His followers to believe and confess the doctrine of Trinity. He even claims Himself to be "Jehovah."  One of the most shocking moments of self-revelation we often miss.  It was upon His arrest in Gethsemane.  When they answered Him who they were seeking, He answered, /I am!/  Upon those words, they fell backwards!  Ever wondered why?  Jesus used there the very words that refer to Jehovah's name in Ex. 3;  the most sacred name to the Jews.  The awe and impression that this temporarily made upon those about to arrest them is pictured in their falling backwards!  For Jesus to make such claim and to accept the confession of Thomas, "My God and my Lord" in John 20 clinch the point.  He considered Himself God!  That's why you and I should if we want to be His followers.

Why do we have to hold that Jesus is God?  Because it takes a Divine mind and Person to rule over the entire earth!  You acknowledge that He has received all power and authority in heaven and earth.  Unless that One has a divine ability to rule such a large place and hear the millions of prayers, rule over the myriad of details, even the hairs on our head and the sparrow on the housetop, who could do that unless you have a Divine ability.  No human person, no matter how exalted his position be, is capable of maintaining and governing this world.   His authority doesn't mean that He change things at His will.  Your suggestion that "no one is able to stop Him from saving one who believes that He is the Messiah but not God" gives me an uncomfortable impression of your view of the Lord Jesus. He is no way is a "independent-minded Child" Who will do it His way even though His Father may not agree with us.  Let's never think of Him in such a light.  "I rejoice to do thy will" was the motto of His heart. And I am sure it is still that way. You are right that the Son is the highest and fullest revelation of the Father.  Heb. 1:1-3 will support that view.  Also other Scriptures from  John 15-16 can be used to support that view. Those Who have seen the Son have seen the Father, He said.  That's because the Father is an invisible Spirit and He has made Himself visible in the incarnate Son of God, Who assumed a human nature.  The incarnation is one the greatest mysteries of the Scripture.  How can God and man become the God-man. Let's adore the Being God, trust in Him and leave the questions which we can't possibly grasp to Him. I hope I have assisted you somewhat.
Warmly,
Pastor Arnoud Vergunst

Top

 

Question (10)

Question: My husband is from a very conservative family. They find things to be very wrong that I was not brought up to be concerned about. Examples: women don't wear necklaces, you don't discuss business on Sunday, females absolutely do not wear pants for any reason, etc. To some extent I am OK with beliefs like these, as they are probably supported in the Bible, but I don't feel as strongly as he does; it's like his family bases conversion on these ideas. (Although I know they don't.) And, almost every other family must think differently--guys are always coming up to him with a "business" question on Sunday that they need a quick answer on.  In other words, I don't like women wearing pants either, but I don't have a fit because someone wears them to a car wash, or when they're working in a garden, etc. And I think necklaces are OK if they aren't your source of pride. etc... I also realize that if we are brought up to think something is wrong, it is wrong for us even though it might not be for another. The questions I have are these:

(1)How do you, yourself, as a minister, explain in your mind the differences between people's convictions: how one person who goes to the Lord's Supper has no problem doing something, but another one who goes thinks it's absolutely wrong to do that same thing?

(2)In the Bible there are those with "weak faith"--who are afraid to do things that God might punish them for--and those with "strong faith"--who are not held back by "do's and don'ts". In our NRC church, of course, we are brought up to think differently! The more do's and don'ts you have, the stronger and better you are! (or so we seem to think) Please explain this more. 

(3)When do we know if something is REALLY TRULY against the Bible? Those who are against pants, necklaces, hair cuts, etc., can find a verse for anything they want. They will say, See--the Bible PROVES it is wrong to do such-and-such. But--When do we really know it IS wrong?

(4)How do I know what is my conscience and what is just a "guilty" feeling? For example, suppose in my mind I was never brought up to think playing CDs of Psalter music on Sunday was wrong. But my husband isn't comfortable with  it. So, now suppose I am home alone and put such a CD on. To me it is OK, but I am feeling guilty because I feel I am not supposed to do it...and if I know it's time for him to come home, I quickly turn the CD player off so he doesn't catch me. You can develop a "conscience" without really being "God's voice." How do we know what is REALLY GOD's voice?

I know this is long, but thanks for any response, Linda

Answer

Hi Linda,

Thanks for your patience.  I was overseas for a few weeks and so everything is catching up.  You have brought up a host of issues which in someway all boil down to one issue:  How do I know what is right or wrong in things that aren't black of white in Scripture?   It is clear that we don't have to discuss what God's will is in issues that He clearly spelled out in His Scriptures, such as the ten commandments.  Yet there are endless areas of every day life where we need make applications to how we are to live.  You mentioned many little details in which we can differ, such as listening to CD's on Sunday; wearing necklaces, dress-codes, etc.  It is also very true what you observed that God's people don't always see the same on particular issues.  I personally grew up with a father who displayed the tender fear of the Lord and yet didn't have any difficulty with particular things that I myself today find questionable.  Yet not for a moment do I doubt my father's relationship to the Lord.  As a child we used to play soccer on the street with the neighbor children.  One time a child of God from within the congregation called on my father and shared how he was bothered by the fact that he allowed us children to play soccer on the street.  Yet this person used to be in professional soccer which had become an obvious sin issue to him.  All soccer, even children playing it, was in his view sin!  For him indeed it was, as it reminded him of his former idol.  But for my father and us kids it obviously wasn't loaded like that.

That's also how you are to consider the various differences between the children of God.  According to Rom. 14 there are differences in degree and understanding of one's faith.  The "weak ones" felt tremendously burdened with particular actions (in Rom. 14 it had to do with eating certain foods and keeping certain days) while the "strong ones" didn't see any sin issues.  In the end God reveals that the weak aren't to "lord over" the strong while the strong aren't to 'despise" the weak.  We need to learn to accept differences in areas that are so-called "grey,"  areas where God has given us allowance to make individual choices.  The issue of wearing a necklace is one of those.  The Bible doesn't condemn necklaces but does condemn the excessiveness, the pride-issues, the worldliness aspects. Yet some who may have been excessive and sinful with ornaments, may upon repentance adopt a very narrow view and seek to enforce that.  Their "narrow view" isn't wrong if it is one of a tender conviction before the Lord but to enforce it upon others is.  So it is with many issues.

Indeed, our consciences are somewhat "shaped " by our upbringing.  If you have always grown up learning that "driving a car on the Lord's Day is sin" than you probably will experience driving a car to church on Sunday as a sin.  Yet, there is absolutely no Biblical basis for condemning the use of a car to come to church on Sunday.  But again, rather than condemning the "weak conscience" we are exhorted to show charity and deny ourselves the use of our liberty.  So if some church would be offended if I would come on Sunday with my car, then I would come on Saturday.
How far do you go to give in to all the various demands or views people around you have?  That's is tough question.  It is my observation that the "shallower the spiritual life becomes, the more the rules multiply in a church."  That was already in the Bible times.  The Pharisees had an exaggerated amount of rules but their religion was ultra-shallow; basically they had no true devotion to the Lord.  Sadly, we see that today again, even in our own churches.  People live by certain 'rules' but have no idea why (as you indicated in your letter) and still they feel somehow better or good because they at least keep the rules.  It is hard to live with such people and then your question, how far do you go to please them, is best answered with another question, "What would the Lord Jesus do in such a case?"  Interestingly, He usually denied Himself His liberty and accommodated Himself to the current expectations.  Yet He also purposely exposed their shallowness and insincerity, hypocrisy and partiality.  He did that through teaching as well as through living.  Eventually He caused the Pharisees so much discomfort, as His works and words testified that all their religion was evil, that they crucified Him.  So what application to your case?  Since you have promised to be under the headship of your husband, you also are to respect him in that and deny yourself the liberties that you may feel you have personally.  That doesn't mean that you have to agree with him in every aspect and I encourage to discuss with him the Biblical basis that we need to establish for what we do.  It is absolutely not enough to say "We do or don't do this because my family always or never did."  We need to be able to formulate our convictions for why we do certain things on God's Word.
For example, your Lord's Day keeping.  Go to Nehemiah and study the last chapters to glean something about the question of discussion business issues on Sunday;  study Is. 58 to consider what God's will is for the Sabbath day;  trace all the instances of Jesus' actions and activities (He went for a meal in a Pharisees' house on the Sabbath day!) and distil from it how He kept the Lord's day; etc.  After all such study, you need to reflect and formulate together how you both will fill in your Lord's day.  Nobody can exactly dictate the details but God has given us the broad principles that are to govern the Lord's Day.  The same goes for dress-code issues; ornaments etc.  I refrain from sharing my personal convictions on these matters because it is you both that need to define the Biblical positions you are to make.

With regard to the "guilt feelings" you may have, again Linda, you need to examine those against God's Word.  Some guilt feelings are unreasonable.  I sometimes feel guilty to take off some time for relaxation but that isn't reasonable because God even patterned the whole cycle of days and nights, seasons as well, for times of rest and refreshments.  Yet our culture can make one feel guilty when one chooses not to be so busy with business, work.   You shared feeling guilty because you listened to a CD on Sunday while your husband isn't home;  you felt sneaky.  That guilt is real because you are in somewhat disregarding the will of your husband (even though your husband may be unreasonably).  If you do it behind his back, I suggest you don't do that.  Rather, share that you respect his opinion but would like to review it Biblically and that you both need to come up with a different solution both can be happy with.  But never go behind your husband's back.  It creates a rift in your relationship and erodes trust. So, I hope I have given you a few guidelines and thoughts.  It is complex  and the issues you raised aren't simply to be answered with more rules.  Some years ago I preached through the Biblical principles about dress-codes.  One member responded with sharing the appreciation but also shared that is much easier to have defined rules given by the leadership.  Yet, the Scripture's principles are clear but the details aren't specified.  This makes God's Word applicable to every culture where the Lord brings His Word.  That's God's wisdom.  What works in the West wouldn't necessarily work in the East.

May the Lord bless you both with wisdom.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top
 

Question 11

In our community the difference in men and women's clothing has become of so much of an importance the wearing of pants is often seen as a reason women should not be allowed to go to the Lord's Supper. (In the community's opinion) Though I realize that in Deuteronomy 22:5 "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God." Yet in the same chapter concerning dress code it mentions "Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woolen and linen together" (Deuteronomy 22:11) I would like to know why we adhere to the one and not the other since there is no direct command given in the New Testament about either of these issues? The only caution in the New Testament concerning dress code I can find is to dress decently, which I find can often be found in woman wearing pants as well as skirts, so why has this clothing issue become such a big deal in our community?  Janett

Answer

Dear Janet,

It seems clothing always continues to be a very contentious subject.  I am afraid far more contentious than the Lord would want to make it for us.   It is obvious that clothing styles keep changing with the ever restless minds of mankind.  However, God's principles laid down in Scripture are not changing.  From Scripture I have gleaned the following principles that should guide us in clothing ourselves. 1.  It needs to be concealing our nakedness and sexual attractiveness to the other race rather than revealing.  In Gen. 3 Adam and Eve made themselves loin cloths but the Hebrew indicates that God made coverings that covered the body from neck to lower legs.  So when we choose our clothing, we need to keep this principle in mind, both men and women.  Tight clothes, skimpy coverage and sensually stimulating aren't according to God's fashion.   We need to clothe so that we help the other person not to sin by being sexually stimulated in their thoughts.  Don't forget to include this principle also when you think about the issue of the women's slacks because (tight) slacks are sexually tempting to males.  Yet, in all honesty, there are also activities in which a regular dress would be immodestly revealing and then you could say that slacks are better again.  Most of our people would hold that opinion when it comes to yard work, or helping on the farm, or even those women-nurses who work in an ambulance.
Here is nice quote from a Puritan:  /If the women don't do their best to avoid being a snare, then they are somewhat responsible.  You must not lay a stumbling block in their way nor blow up the fire of their lust.  You must walk among sinful person as you would do with a candle among straw or gunpowder or else you may see the flame which you did not foresee when it is too late to quench.   /I know families where the girls are never allowed to wear slacks but they are allowed to wear short skirts, tight blouses, low-neck lines etc.   They may feel good about nor allowing slacks but they certainly miss the point! 2. It needs to be gender-distinctive.  The verse in Deut. 22 you quoted is not always well understood.  Notice that God adds to this verse the word "abomination."  In Scripture this always refers to something of horror, detestation, loathing. It is used 117 times in the Bible.  God has marked the following sins with this word: idolatry (Deut. 7:25), sexual perversion (Lev. 18:27), occult and witchcraft (Deut. 18:9-14), human sacrifice (Deut. 12:31).  Looking at those passages, it seems clear to me that far more is meant in this verse than a female putting on a male clothing or vice versa.  Comparative study of the words "that which pertaineth" reveals that it is used to refer to the "things of a man or woman" such as armor, instruments, weapons, tools and clothing as well.  Thus it seems to point to the various things used in different occupations.  Therefore I agree with those who see this verse as forbidding the sex-role reversal and even more, transvestism.  Transvestism is when a male begins to act and live like female and vice versa.  Today even surgeries are performed to make such reversal even more physical.   Mostly this was associated with homosexuality, fertility rites and idolatry.  Seen in that light, it is clear why the Lord adds the word "abomination" to this practice.  God has stamped upon human nature a definite distinction in the different sexes and has created "feminine and masculine" (as it literally states in Gen. 1).  This uniqueness of the male and female personhood is also expressed in various occupations, use of tool and equipment (some need great use of muscles) but also in clothing style.  That doesn't mean, however, that this verse has nothing to say about the differences of male and female clothing.  Our clothing should remain gender distinctive in such a way that it always clear whether you are a male or female.  Erasing those distinctions would be a transgression of this commandment.  The common argument used that today's women's slacks are totally different than men's slacks isn't the point.  In the Bible times there was probably less distinction in the male and the female robe.  To maintain, however, that the wearing of slacks by a woman is breaking this commandment, seems also unrealistic.  Our clothing should never cause "confusion," or hinder the identity of the male or female;  we should never seek to blur the line of distinction.  The way this is done is somewhat culturally bound.  When Moses wrote Deut. 22, the people were wearing skirt-type of clothes yet both were also wearing distinctive ornament of head-dresses, jewelry and especially the males would have beards!  So Deut. 22:5 forbids creating such confusion in clothing, occupation, roles which would lead to a sex-reversal, thereby overturning God's created order.
3. Clothing should be sober and functional to the occasion (1 Tim. 2:9-10;  1 Peter 3:14)  The priest wore special clothing while serving in the Tabernacle;  he didn't wear this at home however.  So there is clothing fitting for work, weddings, funerals, offices etc.  Yet of course, they are to agree with the first two principles.
4. Clothing is governed by the law of charity (Rom. 14:13-17)   Most people have a hard time obeying this command of God.  Scripture doesn't always define exact lines of acceptable and unacceptable. That's also true in the clothing issues.  Yet charity will do everything not/never to grieve or offend a weaker brother in the faith.  Charity will impose a severer law upon self and allow larger indulgence to others.  So sometimes I need to deny myself a right in order to serve others.  So if in your church family community slacks remain an hot issue, then you owe it to your church family to not push your own point.  I don't mean to say with this that female-slacks isn't a real issue but that you are also to be guided by your surroundings.  In Fiji-culture, all men walk with some long skirt while women wear a different type of skirt.  If in that community it would be an offense if I would walk with normal slacks, what do you think I need to do if I live among them? So, these are a few thoughts on this difficult area.  Your question about the different textiles, and later about the different sorts of seeds that couldn't be mixed, isn't clear.  In the seeds mixing, the Lord may have cared about the development of hybrids but I don't really know.  Yet is noticeable that the "abomination" isn't added to either of these commandments.  What was an abomination to God in the OT is still an abomination because it deals with the laws of holiness.

Warmly,

Pastor Arnoud Vergunst

Top
 

Question 12

Question: My husband and I are trying to find out what the biblical view of tattooing is. Could you please help us out with clarifying the text in Leviticus regarding them? Some info we've read states that when Jesus died the OT laws regarding some Jewish traditions were done away with, allowing them to wear mixed fibers in clothing and have tattoos as forbidden previously. The website was www.clarifyingchristianity.com.

Answer

Hi Sally,

The verse in Leviticus 19:28 is clear.  I would agree with Matthew Henry that many of the commandments in this chapter are not ceremonial or social but applications of the moral laws and therefore permanent.   Especially consider the verses around the one on cutting the flesh and tattoos, you cannot simply lift out vs. 28 and claim that this one isn’t applicable any more in the NT times.   Observe that vs. 28 is in connection with enchantments, observing of (astrological) times;  the rounding of corners of the beard was in connection with idolatry.  In vs. 28 the Lord is still dealing with practices which were very common in the surrounding nations. 

 The “making of any cuttings in your flesh” was clearly associated with the dead.   Blood letting was a common ritual to unleash the demonic and supernatural powers.  Because the Lord says that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lev. 17:11) therefore blood remains highly valued in the occult world as a power source.  As the Scripture next moves to tattoos, the implication is that tattoos may also be connected to the evil practices in connection with paganism.  Every historian will trace tattoos to religious paganism.  Even today tattoos are heavily found in idolatrous people and always in connection with false religions.   Undoubtedly because of that association with heathenism and devil worship God forbade tattoos to put on the bodies of His people.   To enforce the obedience God added the words, “I am the LORD.” 

 Did you know that even today, the most common theme in tattoos is death.   The symbols of the skulls, snakes, demons, spiders and spider web, flames and fire are the most popular symbols. 

 The argument is sometimes raised that tattoos are only forbidden if associated with death or religious themes.  Non-religious tattoos are falling under this category, such as flowers, names and other rather innocent pictures.  My conviction, however, is that Lev. 19:28 does forbid any tattoo.  If you read the verse then you notice that God connects the cutting of the flesh “for the dead” but He doesn’t limit tattoos to that but simply states “nor print any marks upon you.”  He doesn’t limit it to association with the dead but extends it as a general principle.   Unger remarked that in Lev. 19:28 there are two prohibitions regarding the disfiguring of the body.  The latter refers to tattooing and has no reference to idolatrous usages but is intended to inculcate a proper reverence for God’s creation.  I agree with that position even though many tattoos have religious connotations.

 Another argument is raised by quoting Is. 44:5 and Ezek. 9:4.  It seems that God there speaks about “marks on the body.”  However, the examination of the original Hebrew reveals that in neither verse tattooing is meant.  The word “printing any marks” in Lev. 19:18 is the Hebrew word “k’thoveth qa’aqa” which literally means writing that is stuck in.  Tattooing is done by sticking needles into your skin and inserting ink.  In Is. 44:5 the Hebrew is “yichtov” which means will write  like someone who signs a contract.  In Ezek. 9:4 the Hebrew for mark is “tav” which means writing a mark with ink.  So neither Isaiah nor Ezekiel is referring to tattoos.

 There is another element to consider.  God knew what the medical dangers of tattoos were.  We didn’t know this till about 3500 years later!  But do you know that tattoos have been proven to increase the risks of Hepatisis B & C, tetanus and HIV and even various sexually transmitted diseases.  Even in today’s modern tattooing places, the risks of contracting infectious diseases is significant.  The ultra liberal city of New York banned all tattooing from their city from 1961-1997 for that reason!  The Red Cross will not accept your blood as a donation for 12 months after you have received a tattoo.  Their guidelines state, “Wait 12 months after a tattoo.  This requirement is related to concerns about hepatitis.”   The Red Cross knows that there are very few strict guidelines and no supervision on commercial tattooist about sterilization of the equipment they use.  Those dangers of infections were of course many times more in the days of Moses.  So besides God’s intention to keep us from associating ourselves with the culture of death, occult, demonic powers, He also wanted to protect His people Israel from all the possible sicknesses they could bring upon themselves.   How good is the LORD!

 Lastly,  over 50 % of all those who received a tattoo regret.  Among those who are married, that is 70 %.  The cost to remove a tattoo are nearly prohibitive with the result that many people walk with the visible reminder of their backsliding and disobedience the rest of their life.

 An excellent website to check out is  www.biblebelievers.com/watkins tattoo/bible.htm

 I hope this will help you know that tattoos is not something a Christian should place on his or her body.  Our bodies were and are to be a “temple of the Holy Ghost.”  In that light we are to treat it like His temple. 

Warmly,

Pastor Arnoud Vergunst

 Top

 

Question 13

In the Bible, weeping and mourning is often mentioned. Joy and gladness are also mentioned, but never humor. Jesus wept, but I never see an occasion where Jesus laughed.
What do you think  of humor in regards to the Bible?

Andrea

Answer

Hi Andrea,

Your question is a good challenge.  It is true that the Bible doesn’t say that the Lord Jesus ever laughed.  He had little reason to laugh.  As the God-man He perfectly understood every thought and need of those around Him.  The world for the Lord Jesus was like a hospital ward with dying, suffering people on the one hand and a war-zone of rebellion, disdain and unbelief on the other hand. Besides the prophet wrote that “He was afflicted, smitten of God” and Matthew added, “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.” (Matt. 8:17) There are people who have gone through such terrible ordeals that they have never been able to laugh again. The Lord Jesus walked with so many sad and grievous things on His mind that it would have tempered His emotional mood so that laughing was probably not something He would even have felt like doing.

That doesn’t mean of course that the Lord Jesus never laughed or smiled.  From the Scripture’s description you can notice that even children were never afraid to be near Him.  To me that means that He was lovely in His dealings, no doubt greeted them or looked at them with a smile of friendliness and inner joy. 

Moving to our life, aren’t there thousands of reasons to smile?  God surrounds us with His mercies every day in so many ways and a sour look isn’t something we should ever have on our faces!  It would be an offense to look like that when you are receiving a constant flow of gifts of mercies and grace.  Personally I can’t stand those grim faces of those who greet the day with growl or a sour look.  Besides, God commands us “to be kind one to another” (Eph. 4:32) and one way to communicate kindness is with a smile.

Now let’s think about your question about humor.  Humor I define as something that brings laughter and relaxation.  Some people have the ability to say something in such a way that you feel like smiling or laughing in response.  It is the ability to make a point in an entertaining way.  It can be used to break the ice (relieve an uncomfortable tension), or to lift someone’s spirit, 

Humor isn’t simply telling jokes. Humor can be constructive or useful even. Children sometimes can say something in a humorous way that brings pleasure or a good laugh. A father can use humor to make a point never to be forgotten.  I read once a story of a father who served his children some very special “brownies.”  After a discussion that it was ridiculous rule not to watch certain movies because most of it was good and only here and there was something offensive, the father delayed the final resolution.  He prepared some “brownies” for the children. Besides the regular ingredients he added a bit of dog poop.  Before he served them he told his children, “I have made these special brownies for you tonight.  I have used the freshest eggs, fine sugar, good quality white flour, sea-salt and cocoa.  However, there is one ingredient that is not the best quality. I added some dog-poop.”  None of the children even touched the brownies! 

Such use of humor I think is very legitimate and useful.  Looking through the book of Proverbs, in which more is said about the use of tongue than in any other book, I came across the following verse.

 Prov. 12:18 There is that speaketh like the piercings of a sword: but

            the tongue of the wise is health

Prov. 12:25 Heaviness in the heart of man maketh it stoop: but a good

                   word maketh it glad.

Prov. 14:13 Even in laughter the heart is sorrowful: and in the end of

                   that mirth is heaviness.

Prov. 15:23 A man hath joy by the answer of his mouth: and a word

                   spoken in due season, how good is it!

Prov. 15:30 The light of the eyes rejoiceth the heart;

Prov. 16:24 Pleasant words are as an honeycomb, sweet to the soul, and

                   health to the bones.

Prov. 17:22 A merry heart doeth good like a medicine: but a broken

                   spirit drieth the bones.

Eccl. 3:4   A time to weep and a time to laugh;  a time to mourn and a

                   time to dance.

 When you review these verses, it must be clear that God doesn’t condemn laughing, joy, cheerfulness or fun. He built into His creation various components that are there simply for our joy. How wonderful He created our taste buds, colors and eyes to enjoy it, wonderful vistas in nature and even the joy of marriage life!  All these things were created to give us various pleasures of enjoyment. Why did God create us with the muscle ability to produce a smile?  In order to use to His glory and to serve our neighbor! 

 Likewise, the ability to add in your speech some humorous expression to bring a smile or lift a down cast heart is to be used for that end.  Not to bring attention upon ourselves but to love our neighbor as ourselves.  In Prov. 14:13 I was struck with the word “that” in the phrase “the end of that mirth is heaviness.”  That means that there is a mirth (joy, fun, happiness) that is not heaviness.  Good and clear humor fits into that category. 

 Yet Prov. 26:18-19 gives a caution against the inappropriate use of humor, As a mad man who casteth firebrands, arrows, and death, so is the man that deceiveth his neighbor and saith, “Am not I in sport?” How often doesn’t it occur that someone has to respond with, “Oh, I was just joking!” Their use of “humor or jokes” obviously went too far. Aren’t we all guilty of that?  

 Today humor has invaded many pulpits.  Many preachers are trying to make their congregations laugh by spicing up their message with humor.  We ought to radically distance ourselves entirely from that method.  As Eccl. 3 says that there are times to weep and times to laugh, so there are places where humor should never be used.  That’s why you look in vain for “humorous” expressions in the Bible.  Scripture is never meant to be entertaining or to be used for entertainment.  It is confront us with the giant truths of God, sin and salvation. 

 Hopefully this gives some direction on your question.  Thanks for asking it!  It made me do some thinking also.

 Warmly, Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 15

Why did the Lord did not say in the Bible when we are going to die?

Answer

Dear friend,
There might be several reasons why.  The Bible would be huge if all the people's names and details of birth and death would have to be recorded.  Secondly, if He would tell you that you are going to die on September 9, 2045, how do you think would that improve your life?  I think you would be very careless and be entirely self-focused instead of mindful that you are here only briefly and that this life needs to be lived to His glory.   Notice what the absence of many deaths did to the first world (before the Flood).  Since so few people died (as they all became so old) there was very little impression of God and our purpose left.  The world became very evil. 

Therefore it is better that we don't know when we are going to die but that it is possible that today it may the last day.  You might say, "That spoils my day as I dread dying."  Indeed, most people think that so they drown out the thought of dying by busily living, partying, amusing or simply denying the reality.  Others are frantically seeking to appease the anger of God they may feel in their heart because of their sins.  Such focus on pleasing Him to earn His favor.  That's also a dead-end street because we can never earn God's favor.  The only way that the dread of death can be taken away, which also enables us to truly enjoy each day that God gives us, is to be reconciled with God through faith in Jesus Christ.  Paul, the apostle, knew that death was going to be gain for him, instead of loss.  The reason: because for him to live was Christ!  (Phil. 1)   John Mason commented, "Death for a Christian is putting of the rags for robes"!
God hides the exact date of your death so that you will use each day to be prepared.  If you are not prepared today, it will not help you to be prepared if you would know when you would die.  It would only make you careless and procrastinate. Therefore death will be terrible for him who doesn't die daily in his thoughts.  In other words, when we don't live consciously knowing that this could be our last day, than we live very unprepared. 

Someone remarked, "Though you may have been nearer death (in your own understanding; because of a close accident) than you are now;  yet it is certain death was never so near to you as it is now!"   So let us think of death not as though we were living but as though we were dying, for that is actually the reality.

Am I morbid (i.e. preoccupied with death)?  Far from it.  I enjoy each day as I receive it from the Lord.  He calls me to use this day for His glory and for the service of those around me.  I must focus on what is right and may enjoy the things He gives us so richly and abundantly.  Still, it is good and profitable to remain mindful (and God surrounds us with those reminders) that we are not here to stay forever.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top
 

Question 16

I had my parents listen to Dr. Murray from Scotland one night to see what they thought of him. Our sermon was on Why it's good to go to a Funeral. It was a very serious sermon and it seemed to be based on the NRC truth. The only thing my dad could get out of the sermon was that the minister didn't speak enough about the work of the Holy Spirit. My mom who walks the life of a believer liked the sermon and would love to hear more from him. I'm wondering what to say to my dad. He cuts down ministers from the NRC constantly. The only thing he can get out of sermons is to find something wrong. What do i say to him when he cuts another minister down with out being disrespectful to him? And WHY does he do this? Shouldn't we be listening to a sermon to get something out of it instead of cutting it down?
I listen to a sermon to try to get something out of it and when i listen to Dr. Murray i try to apply it to my life, but every time my dad slams him and all ministers i get discouraged and do NOT know what to do. Please help!
 

Answer

Dear Lynelle,

How difficult to have your dad react like that.  Ultimately only one Person can cure him from his hyper-critical attitude. Many people listen through their own filters to God's Word rather than in the Berean attitude of searching the Scriptures whether the things they heard were God's truth.  The "mental filters" are prejudices.  Even Nathanel had one, "Can anything good thing come out of Nazareth?" (John 1:46)  By that attitude he nearly lost the opportunity to meet with the Lord Jesus Himself. But notice how Philip responded to this put-off attitude?  He appealed to Philip with "Come and see."  There is no point arguing with your dad.  The more you argue and debate, the more he digs in his heels to maintain his position.  Only sharing with him "Come and see" as you did by inviting him to listen to the sermon of Dr. Murray.  Undoubtedly Philip prayed that Nathanael's heart would be changed when he would meet the Lord. Only the Lord Himself could do it and He did it! 

Mental filters became part of us from the day of our fall into sin.  Our minds are darkened to the truth of God's character and to the value of His Word.  Education (which preaching is) can strengthen that kind of prejudice.  Every unregenerate mind will make misapplication of the best sermons.  Even Jesus' sermons were rejected by the unregenerate mindset of the hearers!  Those regenerated also continue to struggle with various 'mind-sets" that may take years to undo. I don't know whether your father knows of saving change of heart but if he doesn't, than that explains the major reason of his attitude. 

Another fact is that many people love the sermons that focus on the description of the work of the Holy Spirit because it leaves them rather undisturbed.  The sermons of the prophets, as well as the Lord Himself and His apostles, is essentially very confrontational.  It is a hammer  and a fire as Jeremiah mentions.  When well and truthfully preached it hurts and pierces.  Hosea speaks about the "hewing of the hearers with the Word."  (Hewing is what you do with an ax!). That kind of a message makes the unconverted very uncomfortable and therefore the only way to remain 'comfortably unconverted" is to choose to listen to sermons that are "descriptive of the work of the Holy Spirit."  Now, don't take me wrong, such sermons in which the essential work of the Holy Spirit is traced and we are examined as to whether there is a saving work within us, are very important.  We are easily deceiving ourselves and building our hopes on sandy foundations. But such sermons aren't to be preached every Sunday.  Our guide for preaching is God's Word and the balance within that Word is to be balance of our messages.

Back to your question, keep doing what you are doing.  God's Word and Spirit are the only way your father's heart can be changed.  Pray that the sermons he hears may be blessed; his eyes be opened; his prejudices taken away;  his heart be humbled to acknowledge that he was/is wrong. 

You are right in your attitude of listening to learn instead of to criticize.  The critical attitude of always finding what is wrong or missing will make one entirely miss the blessing.  No minister's sermon is ever going to be perfect or says everything there is to say.  A sermon is the expounding of one passage of Scripture and the Holy Spirit can use a sermon on how to parent children to convert a man and convince him or her of her sins.  Too many people think that only when the work of the Holy Spirit in how God converts His people is going to convert people.  Such a mindset is extremely narrow and indicates a great misunderstanding of the work of the Holy Spirit.  Your poor father misses many a jewel of truth brought out in the sermons because of that filter.  God alone can take that filter away from him.  So, keep sharing but also keep praying for him.

Regards,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 17

How do you put your mind on good things of the Word of God?

Answer

Dear friend,

Let me begin with another question:  When in school or study, how do you put your mind on the valuable teachings of the science book or history text?   The answer is that you make a choice to pay attention, or set yourself down with a book and discipline yourself to focus on those things.  If you at that time have a radio blaring in your one ear, your little brother pulling on your arm you probably be very distracted.  So you pack up your stuff and find a quiet room.
When it comes to focusing our mind on the good things of God we encounter even more opposition and obstacles.  Satan will marshal all his devices together to discourage, hinder, distract and plug up our
minds.  Our own hearts also can feel like lead and will absolutely resist to even think about the things of God.  Yet as Paul used the example of the athletes in 1 Cor. 9:24-27, so I would like to do that also. People in various sports push themselves beyond their limit; discipline themselves to exercise, place all kinds of restrictions upon their bodies in order to obtain a corruptible crown.  Listening to their stories, you hear how their muscles object, scream for rest and often they don't feel like doing one more push; yet they maintain their mind focus on the crown.  In that sense, the children of the world are wiser than the children of light.  The world realizes that nothing will come without  effort.   Do we also realize that in the spiritual aspects of life nothing will come without effort?  The Lord Jesus admonished to
labor not for the perishables of this earth but rather to labor for such things that endure.

In the parable of the sower was a section that was "the wayside."  The seed of the sower bounced off and went nowhere.  Jesus described in that soil (hearers!) a person who has a heard that is "packed down by many footsteps."  That's the person who immerse his mind the whole day to the stream of "footsteps" of information coming through the various communication sources.  It will be very hard to concentrate such a mind that is daily immersing itself in such activity on God.  Let me add that an over-stuffed agenda with all kinds of commitments, many which are voluntary choices, is another way to pre-occupy our mind with the things of this earth.  How hard to pull away our thoughts and focus them on God!  So, take a good look at your daily agenda as well as to what information you expose your mind all day and everyday!   Not too many veggies are going to grow in my plot if I allow everyone to walk over it all the day.

The way we need to keep our minds focused on God is by disciplining ourselves to the reading and studying of His Word: /daily sitting at His feet/.  That means we need to schedule the time slot somewhere in our day, each day for a start.  Without that discipline of making an agenda point to read and study the Bible, it will be pushed off.  Secondly, meditate on John 4:23, the last part.  It is an astounding revelation the Lord Jesus gave.  The Father is actually seeking such to worship Him!  He is the first for sure.  Therefore carry in mind that majestic saying of Luther, "We don't need to overcome God's unwillingness but are called to lay hold of God's willingness."   He seeks you as sinner that you would worship Him.  How often don't we come dreamily and drearily to the use of the means of grace instead of anticipating the meeting with a great God.  He may for many wise and just reasons keep Himself distant from us.  Mostly because He sees sins we aren't dealing with.  That always destroys relationships and certainly between a holy God and we unholy creatures.  Lastly, remember that God is seeking such that will worship Him.  We are always out to "get something out of it."  Yet our focus ought to be "to give God what He deserves, and that is worship."  Worship is expressed in various ways as singing, praise but also in repentance and obedience to His holy will.

Hope these thoughts answer your question.  May God bless you richly.

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 18

Question: Where in the Bible can you find support for the idea that baptism is the NT equivalent of circumcision in the OT? You can find a lot on support for infant baptism, but not much on that particular point, and if you can't prove that baptism follows on from circumcision, it makes it a lot harder to support the infant baptism, because the main arguments for it rest on the assumption that baptism follows on from circumcision.

Answer

Dear Christina,

Though the reasons to baptize the children of the covenant-church are various, one of them is indeed that in the NT we find no more the requirement to circumcise believers and their children.  In the OT any male non-Jew who desired to join Israel, needed to be circumcised to receive the token of his surrender to the covenant revelation of Jehovah.  Think of  how God came against Moses and was ready to slay him because he had omitted to circumcise his own children for many years to avoid war with his wife.

In the NT we find the example of Cornelius in Acts 10.  He was a "god-fearer" which meant that he worshiped the God of Israel but hadn't become a formal Jew through circumcision. He didn't follow the Jews in all their rituals.  If he had lived earlier, maybe eventually he might have because not being circumcised stood as a barrier between him and the God of Israel. Only those circumcised were regarded as being full members of the covenant community.  But in his case he didn't because Peter preached to Him the Gospel.  After having been filled with the Holy Ghost, he is baptized but not circumcised.

In the NT meeting in Acts 15, we don't read that Gentiles who repented and believed the Gospel needed to be circumcised.  From other church history sources we can observe that circumcision entirely disappeared from the early Christian church.  In Galatians Paul opposed false (Jewish) teachers who were insisting that Gentile believers had to be circumcised.  Especially in Gal. 5:6 and 6:15 the apostles finishes off with this Jewish demand.  Also in the letter to Colossians, where the same pressure was placed on believers by Jewish teachers, Paul wrote Col. 2:11-12.   (I trust you have looked up the verse...) Paul actually tells them, "You are already circumcised in your heart (the dying of the old man and the rising of the new man) which is pictured beautifully in your baptism." 

Another line of reasoning is that the "blood sacraments" of the OT are entirely fulfilled in the blood of the Lord Jesus.  Both the circumcision and the pass-over looked ahead to Christ's shedding of His own blood to atone for sins.  As this has taken place, we now commemorate His sacrifice sacramentally without the actual shedding of blood.

The fact that in the NT both male and female are equal in the participation of NT blessings is another argument for the abolishing of circumcision.  Women were not circumcised in the OT but are baptized in the NT.  I don't know exactly the reasons for that but have a few interesting thoughts.  But that's not part of your question.

Lastly, there are many ways in which circumcision and baptism are alike.  I found this helpful comparison in the book by Robert Booth showing that although there was a change in outward form, there was no change in meaning when baptism replaced circumcision as the sign and seal of the covenant of grace.

Circumcision and Baptism                                References
♦ both are initiatory rites                                   Gen. 17:10-11; Matt. 28:19; 

                                                                        Acts 2:38-39;  8:12-13

♦ both signify an inward reality                          Rom. 2:28-29;  Col. 2:11-12;  Phil. 3:3

♦ both picture the death of old man of sin          Rom. 6:3-7;  Col. 2:11-12

♦ both represent repentance                              Jer. 4:4; 9:25; Lev. 26:40-41;  Acts 2:38

♦ both represent regeneration                            Rom. 2:28-29;  Titus 3:5

♦ both represent justification by faith                  Rom. 4:11-12;  Col. 2:11-14

♦ both represent a cleansed heart                      Deut. 10:16;  30:6;  Is. 52:1; Acts 22:16; 

                                                                        Titus 3:5-7

♦ both represent union and communion with God       Gen. 17:7;  Ex. 19:5-6;  Deut 7:6;  Heb. 8:10

♦ both indicate citizenship in Israel                      Gen. 17:4; Gal. 3:26-29;  Eph. 2:12-13; 4:5

♦ both indicate separation from world                 Ex. 12:48; 2 Cor. 6:14-18; Eph. 2:12

♦ both can lead to either blessings of curses        Rom. 2:25;  1 Cor. 10:1-12; 11:28-30

 

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

 

Top

 

Question 19

How do you know for sure if you are saved? How do you know that you are not deceiving yourself? How can you be absolutely sure?

Answer

Dear friend,

Important question.  Assurance of salvation isn't not something to take lightly especially when we know we can deceive ourselves in this aspect. In Matt. 7 the Lord warns about those who come to heaven's gate without the spiritual relationship with God through Christ.

To answer your question I will make use of a portion of the rich heritage of our Reformed writings.  This time let me use the Canons of Dordt.  These articles deal with many different subjects of doctrine but one of them is also about the assurance of faith.  I assume  you have access to the Canons of Dordt so I don't have to write out the entire article.  If not, I am sure you will let us know. You can find the Psalter on-line on our website and in the back part, pages 96 and onward, you will find the Canons.

Let's first go to Art 12 of chapter 1 (page 99). There is stated that God's elect shall find out in different ways and different strength the assurance of their salvation.  Not everyone will be equally assured of their salvation. The reason one will be saved is because of God's election, a deed of God's will from all eternity in which He has determined who will be His people.  This is completely hidden from our sight.  Yet one will know his/her election by the fruits of this election.  In other words, by God's work within the heart will you know whether He has chosen you.  One way of assurance is therefore by "observing in yourself the unmistakable fruits of election."  What are those fruits?  Notice that they list a few of the saying of the Lord in Matt. 5. In that chapter the Lord Jesus gave us 7 personal-descriptive characteristics of someone who is born again.  Now meditate or study these seven characteristics of God's heart-renewing grace.  Compare yourself with those seven marks.  You can never go wrong with these marks.  No matter what kind of conversion experience you have had, these seven statements are to be reflected in your life. Paul and Samuel would recognize each other in these sayings though both of them had such a different conversion story to tell.  I always say that your "conversion story isn't the proof of being saved."  It is the marks of the Lord Jesus which you are to find in your heart. If you have access to books, pick up Thomas Watson's book on the Beatitudes.  Otherwise, I did preach a series on these verses and so you can check the archives of our website on that.  If they aren't there, let me know and I see if they can still be added on there.

The next article that deals with assurance is in Head 5, art, 10 (page 113). Notice that in this article we are taught that assurance doesn't come through some spectacular revelation of God. Some people may speak about visions and voices or other unique events in their life by which they are assured of their salvation.  The authors of this article didn't go that way.  They again lead us back to the Scripture.  God uses always His Word through His Spirit to assure His children of their salvation.  He kindles faith in the promises of the Gospel.  There are plenty of them in the Bible given for our comfort.  However, so often we don't dare to believe those promises.  But the Spirit will kindle at His time and His measure a faith in those promises.  The more faith in those promise, the stronger our assurance will be. Especially when the Spirit joins His testimony to our spirit.  In the first point we notice that 'our spirit' can observe the very marks or characteristics that I am alive.  At this moment, my own spirit testifies that I am alive: I am breathing, typing, thinking, talking!  So also spiritually our own spirit or soul can testify, "One think I know, once I was blind but now I see."   Yet when the Spirit bears witness through the Word, under the preaching or your personal reading or even meditating on His Word, then our assurance of salvation will be the stronger.

That article then also point out that the desire and effort to be holy is an indication that there is spiritual life in you.  Man hungers for happiness;  renewed man hungers for holiness and will never feel happy except they are holy.  So if you find in yourself the inner desire to be holy and strive for that day after day, looking to Christ and using His means of grace, you have a spiritual mark of being born again.  See also question 86 of the Heidelberg Catechism (page 66).

Lastly, in the Canons after Head 5, you find a section of 'rejections.'  Let's go to rejection nr 5 (page 115).  In this rejection the Synod men torpedo a sentiment that you can only be assured of your salvation if you have indeed some great and wonderful special revelation.  They mean with that a 'revelation' that is without the Word of God and consist of some mystical experiential event. Their answer is so Scriptural.  Notice how they again point to the marks of grace.  They use the word "deduce."   That is conclude. If I can find in myself those marks of God's Spirit's gracious renewal, I may draw the joyful conclusion that His work is in me.

Hopefully this will give you some direction in searching for this answer.  The work of the Holy Spirit within us is the 'spiritual forensic evidence' that He is working and living there.  People are put into prison because their 'fingerprints were found at the crime scene.'  Likewise, when I can find or trace the fingerprint of the work of the Holy Spirit within me, I am to thank the "Father that He has made me meet to be a partaker of the inheritance of the saints in light."


Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst
 

Top

 

Question 20

Question: I was once a very avidly Reformed person. I used to love the Reformed tradition, and the Puritan model...that was until I began to see the holes and inconsistencies in the positions held (e.g.the "regulative" principle is more regulative for some than others). My struggles with these things has caused me to seriously re-examine many things,including authority in the Church...

You mentioned in your Belief Statement that the Bible was surpressed for centuries after the Early Church and substituted for fables, etc.
(I am assuming that you mean by the Catholic Church). I was wondering how this could be the case when it was the same Catholic Church that affirmed the Canon, and preserved the Scriptures through the centuries. It is also interesting that the Reformed Churches "traditionally" hold to infant baptism often using the argument of the Early Church together with the Scriptures to make their case. However, the argument from history only goes back to the 4th century – a time when the Catholic Church was already supposedly imposing all sorts of fables for people to believe.

If the Church was in darkness for the many centuries between the time shortly after the Apostles and the Reformation, how do you interpret the promises of Jesus that (a) He would be with His Church always; and (b) the Holy Spirit would lead the Church into all truth? Did Christ leave His Church for those
many centuries when it was in darkness, or was He still there? If He left the Church, did He break His promise? If He didn't leave the Church, why did Luther, Calvin, leave?  

Answer

Dear friend,

My apology for the late response.  An overseas trip put everything back. 

Perhaps the  difficulty you experience regarding the statements about the ‘church in darkness’ is that you fail to distinguish that there is a ‘visible church’ (all formal church members) as well as an ‘invisible church’ (all true, regenerated believers).   Or simpler, a ‘church with a small ‘c’ and the Church with a capital ‘C’.  These phrases capture the Biblical teaching that there is ‘wheat and chaff’ in the earthly phase of Christ’s Spiritual kingdom.   With that teaching (see Matt. 13) the Lord taught that there will be believers and unbelievers within that which He called ‘the kingdom of heaven.’  That is clearly reflected witnessed at every stage of the history of the church.  In the ages after the Apolostic Church, the formal Western Church (Roman Catholic) continued as the church.  Less and less, however, were God’s true people (the Church) found among them.   I am convinced that God has reserved his ‘seven thousand’ among them as well.  In the centuries before the Reformation you can read about many who were true Gospel believers and teachers.  Since the political power of the Roman Catholic Church was unchallenged, these lights were snuffed out.  However, God was at work in the rising nationalism, increased learning etc to break the power of the Roman Catholic Church.  Unable to quench the light of men like Luther, Calvin etc. because of their curtailed political power, they were forced to leave the Roman Catholic Church.   Neither had the intention to leave but to reform and return to the pure teachings of God’s Word. 

With that short survey I answer your questions.  God was always, and never left, His people, the Church, even though the visible or formal church did so deeply corrupt itself.  Even today, there may be true believers found in Biblically and doctrinally unsound churches.  He never leaves His people as He has indeed promised.   But we may never make “His people” or “His Church” the same as church or denomination.

I hope you will return to the teachings  God revived through the Reformation and later the Puritan teachings.  You discovered holes in it and we will probably always meet with inconsistencies and failures in any interpretation of God’s Word.  But let that not drive you away from Scripture and from the God of Scripture.   I maintain, however, that the pure Reformed teachings are an accurate reflection of what God teaches us in His holy Book.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 21

Question: How come I cannot find myself as all that bad?  I mean, sure, I say the not-so-nice comment to my sister, or I grumble about the doing the dishes.  But I cannot see myself as all that bad. Why? I look very hard, but I cannot find it. I cannot find the “total depravity" that Calvin talked about.

Answer

Dear friend,

I appreciate your honesty.  The teachings from Scripture, as they are reflected in statements like “total depravity” don’t always seem to line up with how we experience it.  So you struggle to see yourself ‘totally depraved’ as Calvin taught.

First, let me remind you that Calvin didn’t teach that but that Calvin reflected what the Bible teaches.  But then what does that phrase “total depravity’ mean?  It means that we have completely lost the holiness, knowledge and ability we once had before the fall.  Now we are capable to all the evil human nature is found capable of doing. That means, if the Lord doesn’t restrain us, you and I would do the things we naturally shutter to do.  One of the earliest references to this condition is Gen. 6:5 where it says, “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”  I have highlighted the words which indicate how total this depravity is.

Now ‘total depravity’ does not mean that every person will live as evil as he possible could.  God’s restraining grace holds most us back from living out the terrible sins of our heart.  I don’t think we will even know how terribly bad we really are. Many people who are not even Christian are still very nice people as far as we can see. But God looks inside these ‘very nice people’ and sees their pride (Look at me!), selfishness (Everyone will think good of me!) or hypocrisy (I do it only because it makes me look good).   Now that ‘nice’ person isn’t so nice anymore.  All he or she cares about it themselves!

By nature we are blind for ourselves but also feel not how bad sin really is.  A ‘not-so-nice comment to a sister’ doesn’t seem too big of a deal.  Or grumbling about doing the dishes isn’t a crime, is it?   Yet both of these actions are transgressions of God’s law.    We may not think it a big deal but to Him it is an offense of the His law. He requires us to be like Him in that we are to love Him and our neighbor as ourselves.  The ‘not-so-nice-comment’ hurts someone He cares about: your sister!  The grumbling about doing the dishes is hurting someone He cares about as well and someone who cared enough about your to prepare a meal!  They both are opposite of God’s most glorious nature: love. Though among us such little actions aren’t too bad, in His sight they are bad. 

Let it be your prayer as in Job, “Teach me what I see not.”  When God does that we will even see our sins in the nicest actions we do.  The harder we will try not to sin, the more we will find that we are totally depraved.’ 

Eichmann was a SS officer in World War II.  This doctor did all kinds of horrific experiments on Jews and war prisoners.  After the war he captured and tried for crime.  They placed him in a bullet proof glass cage during the trial.  Survivors of the camp would testify against him.  One man, who bore the torture marks of Eichmann on his body, broke down in sobs when he saw him sitting in that glass cage.  After the trial, reporters cautiously approached him with the question what made him cry so intensely when he was in the court room.  One ventured, “Was it the revived memory of what he did to you that caused you to break down like that?”  His answer was stunning.  “No, that didn’t cause me to weep.  As I saw him sitting there in the glass cage, I realized that we are like Eichmann.  He lives within us.  Only grace keeps us like the glass cage kept him.”   Now this was indeed received a striking inside in the ‘total depravity’ of our human heart.  May God keep us from living out the sins that Eichmann lived out but may He also keep us from thinking that our human hearts aren’t as bad as his. 

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 22

In Matthew 10:1 is written: "And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease." And in verse 4: "and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him." How is that possible? Judas got an
appointment to preach the gospel?

Answer

Hi James,

The reason that God gave his twelve disciples this authority to preach and even do miracles had nothing to do with the persons themselves.  It was to give testimony to the claim of Jesus to be the Messiah and to introduce Him and His message to the people.  In other words, they were His instruments to advance God's Kingdom in and through His Son Jesus Christ.  God has often used various instruments.  Often people that were very wicked.  Think of the Babylonians and Assyrians. In Ps. 17:13 David calls the "wicked, which is thy sword."  He even used the Jews to fulfill His hidden will. Peter said in Acts 4:27-28, "For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus ... the people of Israel were gathered together, for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." In the OT He even used Balaam to make some beautiful prophecies of the coming Messiah.

So back to Judas Iscariot, God used Him in His service even though He knew that although Judas Iscariot began to follow Him, he eventually would betray Him. In John 6:70 Jesus even said, "Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"   At first Judas Iscariot was undoubtedly sincere about his intentions to follow Jesus.  His understanding of Jesus Christ was, however, completely earthly.  In all fairness, the other disciples also did have this expectation at first as most of all the Jews did.  But throughout the years of Jesus' ministry, Judas more and more hooked off.  Jesus' kingdom was not the kind he desired.  This caused a great anger and hatred within Judas' heart.  It led finally to his act of revenge in which he betrayed the Lord Jesus. 

Did Jesus then make a mistake in allowing Judas to be His preacher and even sending him out with the others to preach the Gospel?  Or did the Lord Jesus send him purposely even though He knew that Judas was fake?  Perhaps neither one is correct.  I think the Lord Jesus sought Judas' repentance all along. Throughout the three years, in which Jesus knew the inner motive and thoughts of Judas, He never gave a single clue about what He knew Judas was all about.  He showed him the same genuine love and care that He showed to the others.  Judas received all the teachings and sermons the others did receive.  He even entrusted Judas with the bag of money as the treasurer.  Till the end He continued to heap coals of fire on Judas' head to seek his repentance.  When finally Jesus announced that 'one of you is going to betray Me,' nobody concluded immediately, "Oh, that will be Judas Iscariot."  They had no clue it was him but neither had the Lord ever given a clue in His dealings with Judas what He knew about him.  Would you act the same to one of your 'friends' when you knew he was setting the net to kill you? 

So to sum up, Jesus wasn't at fault that the preacher He sent out wasn't sincere.  Judas had come and joined himself to Jesus.  When Judas preached, he would have preached the truth, "Repent ye and believe, for the Kingdom of heaven is near."  We may assume that he also did miracles.

Paul wrote about 'preachers who also didn't preach Christ out of the right motives.  In Phil. 1:15-17 he refers to believers who were preaching from selfish ambition, envy and strife.  But notice that Paul rejoiced nonetheless.  Why?  Because the teachings of Christ were spread around and that's what rejoiced Paul. 

For certain, Judas wasn't a believer and therefore this passage doesn't completely apply to him.  Still, he was used by God and what how much he had to answer for, when finally he hastened himself through suicide before the judgment seat of Jesus Christ.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 23

Question: In our congregation there are many people who are very ill. Several persons have cancer, a very young boy of 19 years old has leukemia. Since January 4 persons have died.
In 1 Corinthians 11:30 Paul writes: "For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep (I suppose: die)." Is God angry with us (as in the case of the Corinthians)? How can we know that?

Answer

Dear Jacob,

Paul indeed alerted the congregation of Corinth to this judgment of the Lord.  Due to their irreverent manner of celebrating the Lord's Supper, God placed His severe judgment upon that congregation. Many of the Lord's people in that congregation were sick and dying as a direct result of the Lord's judgment.

The Bible does lay a direct link between sin and God's judgments in sicknesses.  In Ex. 15:26 God says, "If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee."  Again, in Deut. 28 God details His judgments of all kinds of sicknesses when the people disobey His holy laws (see especially vs. 21-22; 27-28). I feel that we don't often enough lay this link anymore.  Paul did and so did James in James 5:15-16. 

Those are God's general principles and we would do well to acknowledge them in our thinking about sicknesses.  However, we must not make the mistake that Job's friends made when they saw Job's affliction and immediately conclude that he had done some great sin.  We know that God in his case wasn't affliction Job for a particular sin issue.  Therefore we need to be very careful when we draw our conclusions.  God can afflict someone for personal sins but also lead His people through the tribulations to mature their faith and image of Christ. (Rom. 8:28-29; Heb. 12:5-11)

In the case of your church family, it is impossible for me to give a clear answer on your question.  Yes, it is possible that there are particular sin issues in your church family that aren't dealt with properly.  God will not bless a congregation where sin issues are ignored.  His Spirit will be grieved and withhold the blessings of the Word ministry. The 'weak' that Paul spoke can also refer to the weakness in spiritual life.  But it is also possible that God would proceed with the judgments of physical sicknesses as well as death as the Corinthians experienced. The Lord hasn't changed from what He said to Israel in Ex. and Deut.

My advice is to wrestle with God in prayer on this particular verse in Corinthians. Maybe you can share your concerns with your pastor/elders and ask them also to pray that the Lord would make that clear to your spiritual leaders.  God raised up Paul to address this issue among the Corinthian church and so God can do among your church family.  

May the Lord uphold your church as they face such serious trials of sickness and death.

Warmly,
Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 24

Does God answer the prayers of the unsaved? Because in James 4:3 it says "Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your own lusts." If you are
unsaved, then it is inevitable that you are going to ask amiss, yet God invites us to come to Him and ask Him for help etc.


Answer


Dear friend,

Are there examples in the Bible of God answering prayers of the unsaved?  If we can find even one example of that, your question is answered.  In Gen. 4 I do find an example already.  God did answer Cain implied prayer when he responded to God's curse, Gen. 4:13-14.  Cain's prayer was even completely selfish.  Later in 1 Kings 21 we meet with ungodly Ahab.  After Elijah brought him God's curse, Ahab humbled himself before God which undoubtedly included prayer.  He heard it and granted him a delay.

How often doesn't the Lord answer prayers like that in our daily life?  People who don't really serve the Lord out of love ask God for help, protection, jobs, spouse and how often doesn't the Lord answer those prayers.  It speaks about God's infinite goodness that He is willing to hear and answer our prayers.

The verse that you quoted is dealing with a specific situation James perceived taking place. The people were fighting and arguing with each other. In that context they were also praying, perhaps that God would bring the other down their enemies.  Instead of 'praying for their enemies that they be saved or changed' they prayed that their enemies' cause be defeated so that they themselves would look good.  God rejects such prayers because the only thing they desire is to triumph at the expense of the other.

Again, God calls us to use our mind to pray to Him.  Read Prov 1:20-33. How can He rebuke them for not having prayed to Him earlier?! That can only mean that God expects us to seek Him, even when we are unconverted. Besides nobody's prayers will ever be pure or perfect.  That's why He has given us a Mediator in His Jesus Christ.  Through Him alone can He hear any prayer.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 25

How can you tell the difference between your heart and your mind? How can you really know that it is your heart that is telling you/believing? What if it is only your mind that believes? How can you tell the difference (with anything) that it is really your heart? and not just your mind?


Answer


Dear Maria,

In the Bible the word 'heart' describes the entire person. It is who you are! That includes your mind, your will and your affections. All three are to be involved if we are believing with our heart.  You have heard undoubtedly about historical faith (mind mainly) temporary faith (affections mainly) and miraculous faith (will mainly). True saving faith includes all three aspects.

For us it isn't always easy to separate or distinguish them.  They mostly merge together.  If you love someone, you love him with your mind, your will and your affections.  Likewise if we love the Lord.  It is a love that is based on what I know of Him (mind).  Through the power of the Holy Spirit that knowledge influences my will and my feelings. It makes me willing, it humbles, it draws, it stirs, it wants me to do things for Him.  In other words, it is living power of His Word and Spirit that we experience within our heart. For many Christians all the knowledge of God and His Word doesn't change their inner person.  They easily live on without a real and close relationship with God.  In that sense it only 'mind' (historical faith).  But where God's Spirit is working, what I know and learn about God affects my inner being so that my life will change in direction and quality.

May I liken it to human relationships.  I use my own example.  For several years I lived in the same congregation as my first wife.  I knew her, did things in youth-group together, saw her at church. But she never meant anything more to me than any other girl in  church.  Until there came a day that I 'noticed' her and within my heart a spark began to burn.  I wanted badly to know her more and be close to her.  Getting to know changed me completely and influenced me for the better.  Now I not only did have a 'mind knowledge' but my will and affections were greatly affected. I certainly knew then that I wasn't just loving her with my mind.

In similar ways the Holy Spirit changes us our entire attitude, commitment, feelings, understanding when He draws us to God. It will not only be 'mind' but it will be everything of you.  Later the intensity of the feelings etc may ebb away and become more settled, just as in human relationships.  But the commitment, will, affections ... so the entire heart is devoted to God.

I hope this will shed some light on your puzzle.


Warmly

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 26

How do I get rid of an internet addiction?


Answer


Dear friend,

With any addiction, at least in my former experience with smoking, it doesn’t seem to work to limit yourself to ‘some slots’ of time when you allow yourself to be involved in the activity you are addicted to.  In your case of ‘internet addiction’ the easiest is to get rid of the internet so that the temptation isn’t there for you.  This is even more important when you live alone and therefore has no accountability.

If that is not possible, for various legitimate reasons, I suggest that you need to establish an accountability system where each day you are going to be in touch with someone about this issue.  If your problem is ‘time waste’ then you need to establish what is a reasonable amount of time to be on the internet.  Each day you need to give account about that to the person with whom you have made the agreement and establish consequences about your choices, both positive and negative.

If your problem isn’t only time but content of the internet sites, then in some sense the same agreement of accountability and supervision needs to be made.  But depending on what you are addicted to, you may need special counseling to deal with the addiction and above all with the sin-issues.

For, lastly, the addiction problem is above all a sin issue.  Both in time and content we can waste what God gives and walk into areas that God has clearly forbidden.  To give a few thoughts and suggestions from this place looks simplistic and therefore I suggest you get into touch with the people in your church that can help you.  It is important to be open with them and seek their help in a genuine way.

In conclusion, only God can truly change our heart so that the sin-addictions will be broken and we come to a complete repentance of that which we have done wrong.  Seek Him therefore together with the use of the means in those God has placed around you: parents, spouse, spiritual leaders etc.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

 

Top

 

Question 27

Dear friend with the question about the "sermon given to a mother-in-law,"'

I am sorry I didn't answer you quicker.  Presently I am still in the Netherlands and didn't have access for a few days.  It is hard to say what to answer on your question;  also because it is such a private matter and this site is such a public site I didn't repeat the question.  For such private matters is would be better to attach your own e-mail.

My suggestion is to share the background of the story with your mother in law.  Honesty is always the best.  It will not be easy to deal with the reaction but maybe it will become the opening to speak to her about the issue that is bothering her.  Begin with telling her that you are very concerned and have struggled how to help her in the difficulties that she is going through.  Apologize for any hurt you may have caused.  Ask for her forgiveness for that's important to receive from her.

Yet I have to admit that depending on the character of your mother in law it may not work out advantageous.  I don't know whether your mother in law is mature enough to handle your admission well.  Perhaps you should ask someone who knows her better for advise as well.  If she doesn't appear to be able to handle admission, and it would make matters worse, then I don't think you do anything wrong to leave the matter.  You haven't done a sin when you have given her a sermon which you thought may help her.  It may have helped already because often when our conscience is speaking the reaction tends to be fierce when we are pointed out our wrongs.

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Leiden, the Netherlands

 

Top

 

Question 28

In Joshua 8:31 I read about an altar of whole stones, over which no man hath lift up any iron. And in Exodus 20:25 I read also of an altar of stone, with the commandment "not to build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it. My question is: why only whole stones?


Answer


Hello Joshua,

In both cases you referred to it is theological reason.  God by that commandments simply reinforced that salvation through the mediatorial and sacrificial death of Jesus Christ is ENTIRELY His work and His provision.  Repeatedly the LORD instructed Moses to make the tabernacle precisely after the patterns He has shown him in the mount.  Not a stitch or hook was left to Moses' imagination.  This also was symbolized in the fact that the stones weren't cultured or hewn by men.  The stipulation that it only were to be 'whole stones' could be reference to the fact that Jesus Christ was unblemished as a Lamb but also that none of His bones were broken.

As an extension of your question, isn't it beautiful how God provided this 'altar' in Ex. 20 (which functioned as the temporary tabernacle)!  The people felt that they couldn't have communion with the Lord directly and feared that if He would speak again, they would die.  The LORD's answered them by providing them an altar through which He would draw near to them and they could draw near to Him.  This "altar" we just paused at when we commemorated the birth of Jesus Christ!  Through Him we can have communion with the Lord.

May God bless us with that.

Pastor Vergunst

 

 Top

 

Question 29

What's the difference between a Muslim extremist and Samson in Judges 16:28-30? Why God gave him his strength back while Samson wanted to avenge HIS two eyes (and not the honour of
God)?


Answer


Hi James,

Good question!  There is much difference between the 'Muslim extremist' and what Samson did in his last act of 'redeeming' his nation as judge. Muslim extremists sow terror to advance their agenda and have absolutely no difficulty justifying killing innocent bystanders and children.  They also do so without any provocation. When Samson did his last act he was already for some time the target of mockery.  In vs. 25 it says that they took him from his prison "that he may make us sport." In other words, they wanted to have some fun with this blinded giant. Since he was helpless they didn't fear him. Perhaps they hit him, pushed him around, made him stumble.  In short they were abusing him playfully. Did it occur to you that this was a 'worship service' of
their Dagon who was mightier than the God of Israel?  (see vs. 23-24) 
That means that the contest here wasn't between the Philistines and Samson but between Dagon and Jehovah!  We tend to forget this ceaseless wrestle through the history of time.

Samson in this setting comes to his last and probably his most courageous act as judge of the nation of Israel. He sacrificed himself for a nation that has basically abandoned him.  In that sacrifice he took down the "top brass" of the Philistines as they had all gathered there in temple of Dagon. By that 'military self-strike' he crippled the nation of the Philistines for decades to come and in that way paved the way for their eventual overthrow under leadership of king David.

Did he commit suicide? No, I don't think we should look upon his sacrifice as a revenge act or a suicide exit from the misery he was in. It appears that 'revenge' was a motive (see vs. 29b) and maybe it wasn't altogether absent in Samson's thoughts.  This OT hero of faith wasn't without some glaring faults.  They are not to be glossed over but it only magnifies the grace of God also evident in his life.

Warmly,
Pastor Vergunst

 

 Top

 

Question 30

In Leviticus 13 God is giving the laws concerning leprosy to Israel. But instead of talking about leprosy it talks about a leprosy (v 8,15). Does that mean that leprosy is a synonym for disease (i.e. a generic term for unclean scabs/boils etc)? But then it also talks about a plague of leprosy. Does that mean that there are different types of leprosy? And what was the difference, why sometimes they had were unclean, and sometimes they weren’t? What is the "background" for these laws?


Answer


Hello Naomi,

I don't profess myself an expert on any of these detailed laws of leprosy and the many other Mosaic details on diseases.  Yet as there are many varieties of cancer which ultimately are still all the same disease, so there may have been different forms of leprosy.  At least it appears that there were different stages of development in leprosy. From what I have read elsewhere, I don't think you must consider  leprosy' as a generic term for boils and scaps, warts and other skin irritations.  Leprosy was definetely a disease on its own.  It is still very found in countries like India where there are leprosy colonies.  Modern medicines has diagnosed it but I don't think has found a definite cure for it. Recently I read a book by a late leprosy doctor who did have quite a succes rate in treating and helping leprosy sufferers. God chose leprosy also for spiritual reasons. The disease makes a person's body  'slowly rot away.' It cause ligaments to fall off, noses to be eaten away and the leprosy suffers smells like death.  Perhaps because of the nature of the disease did the Lord select this one as a spiritual representation of what sin does to us.  Eventually the leper was excluded from normal society, even separated from wife and children.  Isn't that a picture of what ultimately sin will do to us? It will bring us into hell where we will share the same fate in the same place without any real connection or comfort.  The only way a leper could completely be cured was by God Himself;  a miracle would have to take place. Jesus healed many lepers and that was clearly a message in itself also. Again, that illustrated the message of the Bible!  Only God is able to cure the sinner; nothing of man comes into this.  It is all His grace, His power, His Spirit, His blood and His thought!  Soli Deo Gloria.

What is interesting about these leprosy laws is something that we didn't discover till the late 1800's!  How did Moses know that leprosy is contagious but only 'airborne.'  Not by touch but through the sneezing or even breathing.  God told the leper to cover his mouth and nose with his hand and cry 'unclean' when someone come too close!  You know why God commanded that.  Moses had no clue that there was a medical reason to this hand!   It provides us with another powerful proof of the Divine inspiration of Scripture.  God's Word is about 3500 years ahead of modern science!

Warmly,

Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 31


How does a calling for the ministry come? Can you have a calling for the ministry when you are not saved? If I do not deceive myself I may believe the Lord has done something in my life but I can not speak of a Christ knowledge, how can I then teach people with such little knowledge of the way of conversion?


Answer


Hello Joe,

Finally!  Sorry for the long delay.

God calls His servants to the work of the ministry by drawing the heart to this work as well as giving them the direction from His Word.  Besides, there also must be an 'aptness to teach' in other words, God will equip His people with the abilities necessary to do the work of the ministry.   Not everyone who may possess saving grace, is necessarily fitted to be an office-bearer within His visible church.

So the desire for the ministry is something that the Lord lays in the heart of His people.  Without that inner conviction and longing to give yourself for this task, there would be something vital missing.  Paul wrote to Timothy that "If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."  (1 Tim. 3:1) Not only is it a good thing but also a necessary thing.

However, everyone who has experienced the grace of God may feel this desire in his heart.  Even female believers may experience a desire for this but know that this isn't God's will for them as He hasn’t reserved that task for them.  Therefore God's servants also can relate that God spoke to them about this calling through His Word. To go without such a Divine direction, we may be running without a warrant.  Therefore in one way or other God will through His Word either direct or confirm that this heart's desire is His calling.  Let this be your chief business therefore at the throne of grace.  Never place yourself into this way until you are fully convinced that it is God's will for you and your life.  I will never forget how my pastor directed me at the time that I struggled with knowing if this was God's will.  After having related to him my feelings and struggles, looking at me calmly, he said nothing.  I asked him, "What do you think?" and his answer was basically, "It doesn't matter what I think!  You have to convince me that you feel that God has called you to the ministry.  It is not my task to convince you that it is."  With that I could go home.  To be honest, I was very upset with him and didn't think he was good pastor.  Later I learned that his answer was the best and wisest.  This calling is something between you and the Lord.  Therefore, Joe, you need to be assured in your heart that God has called you and is sending you forth to seek to attain to this office.

Lastly, God speaks through His providence.  If He has destined you to be a 'pastor and teacher' He would also have given you the certain abilities to take up this task.  Not everyone has the qualifications of character to be a pastor.  I am going to refer you to Brakel's books, entitled The Christian's Reasonable Service. He has a very instructive chapter on the calling to the ministry.

Lastly, your question about a "Christ knowledge." From what I understand of your question is that you have hope that a work of grace has begun in your heart. Yet you feel yourself so poor in the understanding and assurance of the work the Lord Jesus.  That is the heart of the Gospel message.  Therefore I suggest you to 'set yourself at the feet of the Lord Jesus as Mary of old.'  Let it be your specific prayer that the Lord would reveal Himself more and more to you personally. The Lord made His apostles "witnesses" and only 'witnesses' can give a more trustworthy testimony of the message they must bring.  That doesn't mean that all God's servants need to have an experiential knowledge of every aspect of what they preach about.  But to preach the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and His great work of atonement etc. cannot be missed in the personal experience of the preacher's heart. Paul's prayers in Eph. 1:16-23 and 3:14-21 are beautiful prayers to be exercised with as it regards exactly your need.


So dear Joe, wait on the Lord in fervent prayer, listening for His answer in the Word preached and read. 

Warmly,

Pastor Arnoud Vergunst



Top



Question 32


Is it possible for a person like this to be saved?
- one who has confessed his sins before God
- one who has said "Amen" to God's justice if He would never look upon him anymore
- one who still stands outside without a promise and hope
- one who makes each day his sin greater and each day must pray for forgiveness
- one who then experiences himself as an hypocrite (for how close can real and almost be)

When sinners are invited to come to the Lord's table, then I would be able to go on first but the elders will come to ask for fruit and then I have to acknowledge that there are only stinking fruit;  for out of me there shall be no fruit till all eternity.


Answer


Dear Hans,

This is one of the easiest questions to answer!  Not only does God's Word answer it numerous times.  Multitudes without number will be able to answer your question from their own experience.  The reason that you can be saved has nothing to do with any of the reasons you listed about yourself.  But the answer is that "Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners."  Even if you would feel yourself the chief, even then there is that hope that He not only is able but also willing to save you.  "All that come unto Me I will in no wise cast out." (john 6:37) To the very murderers of Christ, God sent Peter with this message, "Unto you first, God, having raised up His Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away everyone of you from his iniquity." (Acts 3:26)

Never doubt whether that you are welcome at the feet of the Lord Jesus.  Never!  Even if all the world and every demon would say so.  Because there is but one mouth you never need to doubt and that is God's mouth as He spoke through the Lord Jesus Christ.

Ask any of God's children, and ask them about their fruits.  If you find anyone that answer you in the positive about his or fruits, hurry on to find a real believer.  Then if you find the most advanced in the life of grace, he will still say that "all his fruits are as filthy rags." Paul, who I reckon advanced in grace, never got beyond 'wretched failure' that I am. 

If so your experience is as you stated, I don't think you have any reasons to fear a conversation with your elders.  A poor sinner and a rich Christ belong together!

May the Lord remember you.

Warmly,
Pastor Vergunst



Top


 

Question 33


After listening to your sermon about election on 11-4 I am a bit puzzled. Doesn't Jesus promise that those who seek Him early shall find Him? But if you are not elected how can He than fulfill this promise?


Answer


Hi Jacob,

Yes, Jesus has indeed promised that and will keep His promise. God points out our duties in His Word and calls us, invites, allures and seek us even long before we seek Him. (John 4:23). The reason that there is any hope for any of us to seek Him with confidence is because salvation is completely a gift of His sovereign grace. God reveals a glimpse of His secret will from all eternity in the Scripture. In that glimpse we discover that He has predestinated from all eternity. Who that will be is not known to any of us. But the rest of the Scripture is God's revelation of His will for our life as well as His promises toward us. We are to give heed to that part of His will.  He promises that those who seek Him shall find Him.

Compare it to a house. There is door that gives access to all the beautiful benefits of being in the house. That door is Christ and He is through His Word calling you to enter into the house of 'salvation.'       The foundation of this house is God's sovereign election.  Without that foundation not only there would be no house but also nobody would come into that house.  Now our focus must not be on the 'foundation' but on the door of the house and how to enter into it.

God's sovereign election of sinners is the only hope for us sinners.  If we have to qualify or make ourselves somewhat worthy, there would be no hope for any of us.  Even if it was dependent on our seeking, again, there would be no hope.  We are depraved and as Paul said in Rom.3, "... there is none that seeketh after God."  God makes us seeking and God leads us in our seeking till we become finders.   The comfort (election) doesn't cancel our duty (to seek).  But it encourages us to seek Him.

Warmly,
Pastor Vergunst

Top

 

Question 34

In 1 Cor. 5:11 Paul writes "But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat." That sounds strange to me. What does he mean? Jesus eats with sinners, publicans and tax collectors. (Luke 15:1-2; Mark 2:15-16) What's the difference between eating in 1Cor. 5:11 and Jesus' eating?

 

Answer


Dear friend,

You have to see that direction in the context of the chapter.  There is church discipline case in view.  A member of the congregation (a brother) is living a gross sin (vs. 1ff). Paul is directing the Corinth church to act Biblically. A person who lives in open fornication cannot be treated with the same privileges as another brother.  We cannot maintain the same 'friendship level interaction' with such a person as if nothing is happening.  Paul said that clearly in vs. 9, "I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators."  We are not to maintain a friendship relationship with sinners.  Meals were and in some ways are privileges you share with friends.  Yet he adds in vs. 10 that we should not carry this into the extreme.  There are people you work with who are not Christians.  They are thus not brothers or sisters. They may live worldly as fornicators.  Can you share your lunch with them or have other types of association with them?  Absolutely, for that is exactly what Jesus did also. The Lord Jesus didn't eat and drink with the publican and sinners because He approved of their lifestyle.  He sought to evangelize them. So likewise Paul cautions not to stop that type of interaction in vs. 10, "Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for them must ye needs go out of the world."
Paul finalizes to point out again (vs. 11) that with 'brothers who are living in sin' this approach should not be followed.  They should not enjoy the privileges of friendship (though we always need to remain friendly) in order that this person may feel how much he is losing by living ungodly.  Paul exhorted like this also in 2 Thess. 3:6 and 14-15.

Hopefully that answers your question.

Warmly,
Pastor Vergunst


Top


Question 35


Question: My wife and I have a question regarding the salvation of our two year old. I was raised to believe that children who are not able to understand and comprehend what Jesus did for us would be saved by Him on resurrection day. We both agree that we are born sinners. She defends that if he were to die today he would spend eternity in hell. Please help us understand better.


Answer


Dear parents,


The question regarding the salvation of 'infants or young children' is a very delicate question. This is not a theoretical or doctrinal question either for many couples do face the reality of these struggles.    Added to this is the reality of the millions of aborted children. So the issue raised is very sensitive.  How many parents don't struggle with the torn and pained feelings about their children they needed to bury.  Besides the sensitive feelings and needs of the parents is the important question of God's honor and glory. To 'theorize' about little infants going to hell or heaven does involve the decree of God.                      Scripture teaches about 'election and reprobation' and that also includes children. Yet the thought that God would sent the 'unborn or still born' or the 'infants that die' to hell becomes therefore a very  sensitive issue.  It concerns the glory and character of God.  Mostly because of this issue did our forefathers at the Synod of Dordt have lengthy discussions on this issue. These discussions resulted in the 17th article in the first chapter of the Canons of Dort.

Where the souls of children go that die infancy is not answered in the Bible.  There are a few examples of children that were saved in infancy, such as John the Baptist.  The child of David and Bathsheba (2 Sam. 12:22-23) and Jeroboam (1 Kings 14:13) do appear to be saved.  Yet the Bible doesn't speak anywhere else about the subject of the children that died in their infancy.  If that's the case, how then could our forefathers write this article in the Canons in which they wrote that 'godly parents have no reason to doubt of the election and salvation of their children whom it pleases God to call out of this life in their infancy'?

First of all, they are writing about children that belong to God's church.  Nothing is said about the 'heathen children' because, as said earlier, the Bible doesn't speak about it.  The article wisely stated in the opening sentence, "Since we are to judge of the will of God from His Word ..."  His Word doesn't speak about the children of heathen parents.  But it does say something about the children of believers. They are 'holy' or 'set aside.'  Our children are spiritually just like any other children, inwardly corrupt, children of wrath, under the curse of God, lost in Adam.  Yet they are called by God to be part of this Church. They are placed in the 'garden of the administration of His covenant.'  That privileged position doesn't change the spiritual state of our children.  Clearly, Scripture teaches that 'not all Israel is Israel.'      Except a man be born again, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.  That is also true of our infant children. Yet this position is of great advantage.  It brings them nearer to Christ than other children.  Our children are 'elected head for head to be placed in Christ's nearness.'  They are not to be considered as 'saved'  unless there are evidences of that in their life.

However, children that die in the womb, or shortly after birth,  or as young children, what about them?  Then the instruction in the Canons becomes 'pastoral.'  They don't teach an automatic salvation of infants.'  But they do insist that godly parents don't need to doubt the election and salvation of their child who dies in infancy.  Why may only 'godly' parents have that hope?  What about 'ungodly' parents?

Godly parents are parents who wrestle with the souls of their children before God.  They seek the best for their children even before birth already.  From the moment they know that the child is conceived, they are lifting up their little one in the arms of faith to the Lord Jesus Christ.  Godly parents realize that although their child in the womb or as young infant isn't committing actual sins, he or she is still a child of wrath, laying under the curse of Adam.  With that reality they are exercised before the Lord.  They are like the parents in Mark 10:13-16 and are bringing their children to the feet of the Lord Jesus Christ so that He would bless them.  If it now pleases God to remove such a child from this life, godly parents may be comforted by the words of the Lord Jesus that He took those children up in His arms and putting His hands upon them, blessed them.  You can also take example of Job.  What an exercised man he was with the souls of his children (see Job 1:5)!

Neglectful parents, even though their child has been 'set aside in Christ' don't have that comfort. They cannot rest on the Scripture in Mark 10:16.  That's doesn't mean that the children of neglectful parents' aren't saved.  God hasn't given us a straightforward answer on this in the Bible.  But neglectful parents don't have the comfort that godly parents may have.  For the Bible is not silent about what the Lord Jesus will do with those children that are brought to Him when they are too small to come to Him themselves.  The Lord Jesus is the same today as He was then.  How eager and desirous He was to receive and embrace these children!  So He is today.  When we bring our children in prayer before the Lord and wrestle for their souls as they are too young to do that themselves, we may be assured that He is as ready to receive and bless our children as He was then.  So if God now takes the children in infancy of such parents, then they are not to doubt but that their child is well off.  Such parents may pray, as I read somewhere, "Lord, we have in Thy name brought forth this little one, and we received it with thanksgiving from Thee. To Thee we have devoted our child from the day we knew he/she was conceived that it may be Thy child, by grace.  It has now pleased Thee to remove this child from life.  Therefore in the same faith whereby we received this child from Thee and dedicated it to Thee, we rest satisfied in Thy way, without being filled with fearful doubt about the salvation and election of our little one.  We know that thou does according to Thy good pleasure which by faith we acknowledge to be good.  We trust Thy promise that Thou would be a God of grace to us and to seed."

That leaves us the question yet if there will be 'little children in hell?"  Will the souls of the 'murdered children' (abortion) go to hell because mostly these children are born outside the covenant?  Or what about the souls of children with 'believing parents' (those that belong to the covenant) who have been neglectful parents in not bringing their child to the Lord Jesus? As said earlier, there isn't a clear answer on this question.  But there an implication we can draw from God's character.  God is a just God. This attribute of God isn't a negative attribute but a positive. He is just in that He 'doesn't reap where He hasn't sown.'  He judges according to the measure of light and opportunity giving to each individual.  Children that die before infancy and young children that die in their infancy, haven't sinned as we older ones sin: consciously choosing to go against what we know is God's will.  God will therefore not punish them as He will punish those who have broken His covenant in personal and conscious choices.  Therefore in the light of this justice of God along with His attributes of mercy and grace, I can find myself completely siding with the opinion of John Gill, who spoke about the children dying in infancy or before birth, "Now though their election is a secret to us and unrevealed, it may be reasonably supported, yea in a judgment of charity, it may rather be concluded, that they all are chosen than that none are."   Let it be noted however, that this is only a conclusion drawn from various observations about God's character and dealings with sinners in general.  So such is only an opinion.  The safest position therefore is to stand with Paul, "Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God."  (1 Cor. 4:5)

Let's us seek to be a parent for our children as Job was for his!  How he wrestled for each of them bringing their names along with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ before God's throne.

Warmly,
Pastor Vergunst



Top
 

Welcome Belief Meditation Sermon Outreach CurrentEvents Links Q&A

Reformed Congregations of New Zealand
Worship Service Times: 10:00 AM and 7:00 PM each Sunday
6 Howard Street, Carterton. Map Contact Us