Dr Paul Allen

Book Review: Knowing Sin Dan Crabtree  It’s a horrible, necessary paradox in the Christian life: If you want to know God more, then you need to know your sin more, too. Here’s how Calvin put it at the outset of his systematic theology, The Institutes of the Christian Religion: “Our wisdom, in so far as it ought to be deemed true and solid Wisdom, consists almost entirely of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves… Thus, our feeling of ignorance, vanity, want, weakness, in short, depravity and corruption, reminds us, that in the Lord, and none but He, dwell the true light of wisdom, solid virtue, exuberant goodness. We are accordingly urged by our own evil things to consider the good things of God; and, indeed, we cannot aspire to Him in earnest until we have begun to be displeased with ourselves.” Calvin, Institutes, I:1, 37-38. Calvin’s point is not that our great, immortal, all-wise God is in some way dependent on our sin to be who he is, but exactly the opposite. Because we

The imperative—“Repent!”—assaults modern sensibilities like nails on a chalkboard. Repentance is often dismissed as the sadistic mantra of self-loathers; or worse, dreaded as a pistol drawn in pulpits to scare sinners into submission. But repentance—the act of turning from sin and toward God—pervades the biblical story as a life preserver for God’s people, not a cruel waterboarding tactic. Strikingly, Jesus’s main message is summarized in the Gospels as: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven, is at hand” (Matt. 4:17; Mark 1:15; Luke 5:32). If repentance is so central in Jesus’s teaching, why is it so peripheral (or nonexistent) in ours? Different tribes give different responses. Progressives tend to deny repentance altogether, rejecting it as fundamentalist fodder. I recently met with a local progressive church leader who feels this way, and during our charitable yet lively conversation, she remarked: “I never address sin from the pulpit. I don’t think it’s helpful to tell people how bad

The death of some Galileans during a time of sacrifice (vv. 1–3); the death of some upon whom a tower collapsed (vv. 4–5); and the Parable of the Barren Fig Tree (vv. 6–9).  The incidents reported here, in which reference is made to the murder of some Jews from Galilee and the death of 18 people in Siloam, is unique to Luke.  Neither of the episodes is mentioned in secular histories (though some scholars point to two or three inexact parallels to the incident of the murdered Galileans; see Marshall, p. 553).  Concerning theme, Evans (p. 46) points to a parallel with Deut. 13:12–18, where the emphasis on turning to the Lord in order to live is quite similar to the Lucan passage under consideration (cf. the similar expression, “all who live in that town,” Deut. 13:15, with “all the others living in Jerusalem,” Luke 13:4). 13:1–5 / Some people who presumably have just arrived from Jerusalem told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices.  For some unknow

One of the most common questions a Christian can ask is also one of the most troubling: What does my ongoing sin say about me? The question is common because all Christians deal with ongoing sin and many with patterns of repetitive sin. And the question is troubling because it ushers us into one of the great tensions of Scripture. We know, on the one hand, that “if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). And we know, on the other hand, that “no one born of God makes a practice of sinning” (1 John 3:9). Every Christian sins — even every day (Matthew 6:11–12) — yet some practices of sin throw doubt on a person’s claim to be born of God. So, what distinguishes Christians from the world when it comes to sin? Puritan pastor Richard Baxter, writing to “melancholy” (or depressed) Christians, offers one fruitful answer: Remember what comfortable evidence you carry about with you that your sin is not damning while you feel that you love it not but

  “Repent!” Thus, “John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, ‘Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’ ” (Matt. 3:1–2). Again, Peter urged the hearers whose consciences had been ripped open on the day of Pentecost, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38). Later, Paul urged the Athenians to “repent” in response to the message of the risen Christ (Acts 17:30). Yet, on other occasions, the appropriate response to the gospel is, “Believe!” When the Philippian jailer asked Paul what he must do to be saved, the Apostle told him, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). But there is no mystery or contradiction here. Further on in Acts 17, we discover that precisely where the response of repentance was required, those who were converted are described as believing (Acts 17:30, 34). Any confusion is surely resolved by the fact that when Jesus preached “the gospel of God” in Galilee, He urged His hearers, “The

When the gospel is proclaimed, it seems at first sight that two different, even alternative, responses are called for. Sometimes the summons is, " Repent !" Thus, "John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 'Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand'" (Matt. 3:1–2). Again, Peter urged the hearers whose consciences had been ripped open on the day of Pentecost , "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ " (Acts  2:38 ). Later, Paul urged the Athenians to "repent" in response to the message of the risen Christ (Acts  17:30 ). Yet, on other occasions, the appropriate response to the gospel is, "Believe!" When the Philippian jailer asked Paul what he must do to be saved, the Apostle told him, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved" (Acts  16:31 ). But there is no mystery or contradiction here. Further on in Acts 17 , we discover that precisely where the

English: A fire axe. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Remember in the Old Testament the prophets, particularly Isaiah , talked about the coming of the Messiah , but that before the Messiah would arrive there would be a forerunner. One who would come and prepare the way for the Messiah. And John is that one who is anointed by God to be the one who's crying as a voice in the wilderness, "Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight His paths." And so in this preparatory mission to which John is sent, and for which he is consecrated by God, he's now calling the whole nation of Israel to be subjected to baptism. Why? What was his message? He comes on the scene and his message is simply this: "Repent . . . " Why? ". . . for the kingdom of God is at hand." The kingdom of God that the Jews looked forward to in the prophecies of the Old Testament was in the nebulous, distant, far-off future. No specific time frame had been given for their expectation of t

Original sin has to do with the fallenness of human nature. Jonathan Edwards wrote a tremendous treatise on original sin. He not only devoted himself to a lengthy exposition of what the Bible teaches about man's fallen character and his propensity toward wickedness, but he made a study from a secular, rational perspective that addressed the philosophy that was widespread in his day: Everyone in the world is born innocent, in a state of moral neutrality in which they don't have any predilection toward either the good or the evil. It's society that corrupts these innocent natives, so to speak.  As we are exposed to sinful behavior around us, our normal, natural innocence is eroded by the influence of society. But that begs the question, How did society get corrupt in the first place? Society is people. Why is it that so many people have sinned? It's almost axiomatic in our culture that nobody is perfect. And Edwards asked questions like, Why not? If everyone were

I love evangelism. It’s constantly on my mind. It is impossible to see a human and not think about where they will spend eternity. It brings joy to my heart when people tell me about their gospel conversations. In a video entitled “Street Preacher Invades Starbucks” (I don’t recommend watching it since it is filled with profanity) a group of men “invade” a Starbucks and then start following and screaming “repent” to a few pedestrians. As the scene got more intense, a lady said some words that should have stopped them in their tracks. I would rather go to hell than be with you! Instead of being proud of this encounter, to the point of posting it as an example of proper evangelism on YouTube, they should have been ashamed. “I would rather go to Hell than be with you”, are not some words that I ever want someone to say to me. And although Westboro and heretical “street preachers” are extreme examples, I think we are all tempted to sin during evangelistic encounters. So here are som