Homeward Bound

Pastor Tim Keller got into some trouble on Twitter the other day as he said the following: "Jesus did not come primarily to solve the economic, political, and social problems of our world. He came to forgive our sins." Seems simple enough, but our ever changing world responds negatively when anyone goes against the current of modern progressivism. I think this statement is something we really need to consider and answer for ourselves. What is the primary reason that Jesus came? Clearly social issues are a major thrust of his ministry. There are plenty of verses that speak to this (Mark 9:37, Luke 16:19-31, Matthew 25:31-46…etc). But is this the PRIMARY reason he came?  Our world has gotten hold of this underlying idea that sin is some sort of cursory problem that Jesus came to solve along with the problems of society which are ever rampant. People naturally assume it rather insignificant for Jesus to come primarily to solve such a "Spiritual" problem when

"Ye write, that I am filled with knowledge, and stand not in need of these warnings. But certainly my light is dim when it cometh to handy-grips. And how many have full coffers and yet empty bellies! Light, and the saving use of light are far different. Oh, what need then have I to have the ashes blown away from my dying-out fire! I may be a bookman and (yet) be an idiot and stark fool in Christ's way. Learning will not beguile Christ." (Rutherford, 390) I love knowledge. I love reading theology and contemplating the high things of God and how he interacts with man. It really is one of my passions. And yet, Rutherford here smacks me between the eyes with the proverbial 2x4. "How may have full coffers and yet empty bellies!" How many of us have so much precious knowledge of God, Scripture, the nuances of theological terms--and yet our saving light is dim! Our light is dim when it comes to handy-grips, to actually living and walking in it. There is indeed a d

Ferguson opens chapter 2 by asking a fundamental question: What is the gospel? "The extent to which the answer we give determines how we preach and communicate the gospel." (565) What had happened with the Scottish church in the 18th century was that it had fallen into a legalistic pitfall of limiting the offer of Christ to those who seemed eligible. They fell into an unbiblical version of Calvinism where the offer of grace could only be genuinely given to someone who showed signs that they were of the elect. This is unquestionably wrong. As Evangelista says in the Marrow of Modern Divinity: "I beseech you, consider, that God the Father, as he is in his Son Jesus Christ, moved with nothing but with his free love to mankind lost, hath made a deed of gift and grant unto them all, that whosoever shall believe in this his Son, shall not perish, but have eternal life." Ferguson then goes to show how this universal offer to all does not go against the Westminster