Category: Theology (Page 1 of 5)

The Doctrine of the Trinity

February 10, 2026 / Marcus Serven / 0 Comments

Written by Dr. Marcus J. Serven

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” Matthew 28:19-20a

Introduction:

Over the years I have had numerous encounters with the “doorstep debaters” who deny the doctrine of the Trinity. Usually they are from the Jehovah’s Witnesses, or they are young men serving as Mormon missionaries. Most of these people have only heard one view concerning the Trinity. Here is an example of a conversation I had one day with a Jehovah’s Witness:

JW: “I don’t believe in the Trinity because it doesn’t make any sense to me.”

Me: “And so are you saying that just because you don’t understand it, therefore it can’t possibly be true?”

JW: “Yes, it is not logical.”

Me: “Do you know everything?”

JW: “Ah…of course not!”

Me: “Since you admit that you don’t know everything, then is it not possible that there are many truths that are outside of your own personal knowledge?”

JW: “Silence…”

Me: “Since God has revealed Himself in the pages of Holy Scripture, then is it not logical that as human beings—mere creatures that we are—we need to humble ourselves to God’s teachings in the Bible and not stand in judgment over them?”

JW: “Silence…”

Me: “Well then, let me show you some of the passages in the Bible that clearly teach the doctrine of the Trinity. I believe you will find them to be a logical and sensible conclusion of what the Bible actually says.”

The reality is that the doctrine of the Trinity is a conclusion based on a multiplicity of biblical texts. The word “Trinity” is not found in the Bible, however, the pages of the Bible are overflowing with the concept of the Trinity. What exactly is this concept? Essentially, it is that the divinity of God the Father is abundantly proved from the pages of Holy Scripture; the divinity of God the Son is clearly demonstrated by the evidences that are recorded in the Bible; and the divinity of God the Holy Spirit is also forthrightly taught by numerous passages in God’s revelation. In addition, both the Old and the New Testaments give many clear proofs for the doctrine of the Trinity. Consider these following passages:

Biblical Texts that support the Doctrine of the Trinity:

There are numerous texts in the Bible that make it clear that the Father is God (Gen. 1:1; Ps. 24:1-2; Isa. 45:5-7; 1 Tim. 1:17). In addition, the Bible speaks of how the Son [Jesus Christ] is God and worthy of all adoration, praise, and worship (Ps. 2:7-12; Isa. 9:6-7; Lk. 1:30-33; Jn. 1:1-5, 1:14-18; Jn. 8:56-59; Col. 1:15-20, 2:9; Heb. 1:2-4; Rev. 1:4-8). Lastly, the Bible makes it evident that the Holy Spirit is God and possesses a divine essence that is equal with the Father and the Son (Gen. 1:2; Matt. 3:16; Jn. 14:26; Jn. 15:26; Jn. 16:7-13; Acts 5:3). Therefore it is logical that God is known as a Trinity—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Beyond that, there are several texts in the Bible where the Trinitarian nature of God is clearly on display. These texts are as follows:

— Genesis 1:26a “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.’” (Note the use of the first-person plural personal pronoun “us” and the repeated use of he first-person plural possessive pronoun “our.” Each word refers to the plurality of the Godhead. This is not three separate Gods, but one God who has revealed himself in three persons. In other words, God is known in the Bible as a Trinity.)

— Genesis 3:22 “The the LORD God said, ‘Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.’” (Note the first-person plural personal pronoun “us” referring to the plurality of the Godhead)

— Genesis 11:7 “Come, let us go down there and confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.” (Note the first-person plural personal pronoun “us” referring to the plurality of the Godhead)

— Matthew 3:16-17 “And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’” (Note the presence of the Holy Spirit, the Son, and [by implication] the Father in this text)

— Matthew 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” (Note the use of the singular noun “name,” rather than the plural noun “names.” This makes it clear that God is one, and that baptisms are blessed in that one name—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”)

— John 10:30 “I and the Father are one.” (Jesus claims to have the same essential nature as God the Father in this verse. Immediately after Jesus makes this bold claim, the Jews pick up stones in order to stone him to death, “because you, being a man, make yourself God.” vs. 33)

— John 14:16-17 “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.” (Note how Jesus calls upon his heavenly Father to send forth the Helper [Gk. paracletos = lit. “helper,” “intercessor,” (i.e.) the Holy Spirit] to minister to his disciples. The Son, Father, and Holy Spirit are all evident in this text.)

— 2 Corinthians 13:14 “The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” (Note the reference to the triune God in this benediction: “the Lord Jesus Christ…God [the Father]…and the Holy Spirit.”)

— Ephesians 2:18 “For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.” (In the immediate context the main focus is on how Jesus Christ has brought together the Jews and the Gentiles. These two groups were formerly separated by a “wall of hostility” (vs. 12), but in Christ they are now “members of the household of God” (vs. 19). The word “him” refers to Jesus Christ. The “Spirit” and the “Father”are obvious references to the two other members of the Godhead.)

Confessional Reconnaissance:

— The Apostles’ Creed (c.140 AD in its initial form)

“I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth; And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead; I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen”

— The Heidelberg Catechism (1563)

Q. 24: How are these articles divided? [i.e. Speaking of the three articles in the Apostles’ Creed]

A.: Into three parts; the first is of God the Father and our creation (#1); the second, of God the Son and our redemption (#2); the third, of God the Holy Ghost and our sanctification (#3).

(#1) Gen. 1; (#2) 1 Pet. 1:18-19; (#3) 1 Pet. 1:21-22

Q. 25: Since there is but one only divine essence (#1), why speakest thou of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost?

A.: Because God hath so revealed Himself in His Word (#2), that these three distinct persons are the one only true and eternal God.

(#1) Deut. 6:4; (#2) Gen. 1:26; Isa. 61:1; John 14:16-17; 1 John 5:7; John 1:13; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14

— Westminster Confession of Faith (1647)

Chapter 2, Article 3. In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost (#1): the Father is of none, neither begotten, nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father (#2); the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son (#3).

(#1) Matt. 3:16-17; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; See Eph. 2:18; (#2) John 1:14, 18; See Heb. 1:1-2; Col. 1:15; (#3) John 15:26; Gal 4:6

— The Westminster Larger Catechism (1648)

Q. 8: Are there more Gods than one?

A.: There is but one only, the living and true God (#1).

(#1) Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 John 5:20

Q. 9: How many persons are there in the Godhead?

A.: There be three persons in the Godhead: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (#1); and these three are one true, eternal God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory; although distinguished by their personal properties (#2).

(#1) Matt. 3:16-17; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; (#2) John 1:1; See also Gen. 1:1-3; John 17:5; John 10:30; Ps. 45:6; See also Heb. 1:8-9; Acts 5:3-4; Rom. 9:5; Col. 2:9

An Economic View of the Trinity:

Some Christian scholars have taught an “economic” (Gk. oikonomos = household administrator) view of the Trinity. Basically, this is the idea that each member of the Godhead has specific duties that they fulfill (Lat. opera ad extra). For example, God the Father is the creator and sustainer of the universe; God the Son is the redeemer of God’s people through his sacrificial death upon the cross; and God the Holy Spirit is the one who sanctifies the believer and assists them through the difficulties and trials of the Christian life. There is some validity to this way of thinking, however, it can be quickly demonstrated that it is superficial. If we examine the statement that God the Father is the creator, then it must be acknowledged that the Son of God was also present at the creation of the universe and that by him all things hold together (Col. 1:16-17). Moreover, it must be admitted that the Holy Spirit was also present at the creation given that the Spirit “was hovering over the face of the waters” (Gen. 1:2), and that the Spirit gave Adam the “breath of life” (Gen. 2:7). Thus, a simplistic explanation of the economic view of the Trinity seems to fall short of reality. Louis Berkhof explains the economic view of the Trinity in the following manner:

“These are never works of one person exclusively, but always works of the Divine Being as a whole. At the same time it is true that in the economical order of God’s works some of the opera ad extra are ascribed more particularly to one person, and some more especially to another. Though they are all works of the three persons jointly, creation is ascribed primarily to the Father, redemption to the Son, and sanctification to the Holy Spirit. This order in the divine operation points back to the essential order in God and forms the basis for what is generally known as the economic Trinity.”

— Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 89

Thus, our understanding of the Trinity must acknowledge that creation, redemption, and sanctification “are all works of the three persons jointly.” With this understanding the essential nature of each person is shown to be the same—all are divine and worthy of worship. Yet, there can also be a recognition of the distinction made between the three persons of the Godhead—in that they are uniquely Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And so, as Christians we affirm the truth that there is one God who makes himself manifest in three persons.

Key Quotes:

— John Calvin (1509-1564)

“Again, Scripture sets forth a distinction of the Father from the Word, and of the Word from the Spirit. Yet the greatness of the mystery warns us how much reverence and sobriety we ought to use in investigating this. And that passage in Gregory of Nazianzus vastly delights me: ‘I can not think on the one without quickly being encircled by the splendor of the three; nor can I discern the three without being straightway carried back to the one.’ Let us not, then, be led to imagine a trinity of persons that keeps our thoughts distracted and does not at once lead them back to the unity. Indeed, the words “Father,” “Son,” and “Spirit” imply a real distinction—let no one think that these titles, whereby God is variously designated from his works, are empty—but a distinction, not a division.” (Calvin, Institutes 1:13:17)

— Prof. Louis Berkhof (1873-1957)

“The western conception of the Trinity reached its final statement in the great work of Augustine, De Trinitate. He too stresses the unity of essence and the Trinity of Persons. Each one of the three Persons possesses the entire essence, and is in so far identical with the essence and with each one of the other Persons. They are not like three human persons, each one of which possesses only a part of generic human nature. Moreover, the one is never and can never be without the other; the relation of dependence between them is a mutual one. The divine essence belongs to each of them under a different point of view, as generating, generated, or existing through inspiration. Between the three hypostases there is a relation of mutual interpenetration and inter-dwelling.” (Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrines, 92)

— Dr. R. C. Sproul (1939-2017)

“The historic formulation of the Trinity is that God is one in essence and three in person. Though the formula is mysterious and even paradoxical, it is in no way contradictory. The unity of the Godhead is affirmed in terms of essence of being, while the diversity of the Godhead is expressed in terms of person…the Bible clearly affirms the full deity of the three persons of the Godhead: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The church has rejected the heresies of modalism and tritheism. Modalism denies the distinction of persons within the Godhead, claiming that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are just ways in which God expresses Himself. Tritheism, on the other hand, falsely declares that there are three beings who together make up God. The term person does not mean a distinction in essence but a different subsistence in the Godhead. A subsistence in the Godhead is a real difference in being. Each person subsists or exists “under” the pure essence of deity. Subsistence is a difference within the scope of being, not a separate being or essence. All persons in the Godhead have all the attributes of deity…The doctrine of the Trinity does not fully explain the mysterious character of God. Rather, it sets the boundaries outside of which we must not step. It defines the limits of our finite reflection. It demands that we be faithful to the biblical revelation that in one sense God is one and in a different sense He is three.” (Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith, 35-36)

“The word Trinity does not appear in Scripture. Nor do the terms homoousios or persona as such appear. That language has entered the vocabulary of the church, indeed the touchstone of orthodoxy itself, is decried by many as an intrusion into biblical faith of speculative philosophy in general and of Greek modes of thinking in particular. However, the concepts these words convey are found in Scripture, and they have been usefully employed in the church. Like it or not, the English language is tied inseparably to concepts of early Greek discrimination…It is important to remember that it did not offend the Holy Ghost to use the Greek language as a vehicle for revelation. What, then, do we mean when we express our faith in the Trinity by the formula: God is one in essence, and three in person? In addition to the numerical differences, the key distinctive concepts are essence and person. Essence, we know, refers to the being, substance, or stuff of any entity. Essence is what something ultimately is. In the formula of the Trinity it is the concept of person that is most troublesome. The term person comes from the Latin persona. It corresponds to the Greek word for face. In the ancient theater one actor could perform more than one role in a play. To assume the role of a different character the actor donned a persona or mask to dramatize the different character. This human analogy breaks down, however, when applied to God…The three persons are equal to each other in deity, dignity, power, and glory. They are distinguished in name, in the order of their being, in the mode of their action, and in their effects.” (Sproul, Right Now Counts Forever, Vol. 2, 97-98)

“This technical discussion of the Trinity can be confusing, but here is what we should come away with: the Westminster divines, following the historic formulas of the church, are being extremely careful to affirm the full deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and at the same time to steer clear of tritheism or polytheism. In simple terms, the Westminster divines are saying that in an absolute, ultimate sense, God is one—one being—yet within the Godhead are three distinct persons or subsistences that must be recognized if we want to be faithful to Scripture. The subsistences, or persons, are more than offices, more than modes, more than activities, more than masks, and more than ways of appearing. The church historically has said that we do not understand how God is three in one. But we do understand that He is not three gods, and that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all divine.” (Sproul, Truths We Confess, 65-66)

Conclusion:

It is important to remember that the doctrine of the Trinity is a theological conclusion that is based upon Holy Scripture. The Bible is clear that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. There are not three Gods, but only one. Therefore, we recognize that there is one God who has made himself known in three persons. These are not three divine “modes” with each “mode” fitting into a differing period of time (e.g. God the Father in the Old Testament; God the Son in the New Testament; and God the Holy Spirit in the Church age). This view represents a heresy called “modalism.” No, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit—the three members of the Godhead—co-exist in eternity, they are not to be confused, nor are they to be divided. They co-operate with one another in all activities related to this world and in eternity. Thus, we worship one God who has made Himself known in three persons—a Holy Trinity.

These three volumes do a very fine job of explaining the doctrine of the Trinity! Start with Sproul, and then work your way into Berkhof and Bavinck.

Resources for Further Study:

Bavinck, Herman. The Doctrine of God. William Henricksen, trans. Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, Reprint, 1978.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Fourth Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1939.

Berkhof, Louis. The History of Christian Doctrines. Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1949.

Elwell, Walter A. ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Second Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2001.

“Christology” by Ronald S. Wallace
“God, Doctrine of” by Robert L. Saucy.
“Holy Spirit” by Thomas S. Caulley
“Jesus Christ” by Robert H. Stein
“Only Begotten” by Everett F. Harrison
“Son of God” by Gary T. Burke
“Trinity” by Geoffrey W. Bromiley

McGrath, Alister E. Understanding the Trinity. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988.

Packer, James I. Knowing God. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973.

Reymond, Robert L. A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith. Second Edition. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998.

Sproul, R. C. Essential Truths of the Christian Faith. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale Publishers, Inc., 1992.

Sproul, R. C. Truths We Confess: A Systematic Exposition of the Westminster Confession of Faith. Revised Edition. Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2019.

The Confession of Faith and Catechisms. American Edition (1788). Jointly published by Great Commission Publications (PCA) in Atlanta, GA, and the Committee on Christian Education (OPC) in Willow Grove, PA, 2005.

Vos, Johannes G. The Westminster Larger Catechism: A Commentary. G. I. Williamson, ed. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2002.

Williamson, G. I. The Westminster Confession of Faith: for Study Classes. Second Edition. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2004.

Dr. Marcus J. Serven, ThM and DMin

Is the Kingdom of God a Present-day Reality?

January 3, 2026 / Marcus Serven

Written by Dr. Marcus J. Serven

“But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.” Matthew 12:28

Jesus Christ instructs his followers to pray in this manner, “Pray then like this: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:9-10). Some Bible teachers have boldly taught that the Lord’s Prayer is not for this present age, but only for a future age (i.e. during an earthly millennium). I believe that their conclusion is a mistaken interpretation of the text. Jesus is clearly instructing his listeners—in their present-day circumstances—how they should pray to God. They are not to pray “like the hypocrites” so that “they may be seen by others,” but “in secret” so that “your Father who sees in secret will reward you” (Matt. 6:5-6). The context is entirely contemporaneous. It is spoken for Jesus’ followers in this present age. Therefore, the phrase “Your kingdom come, your will be done, as it in heaven” must also be interpreted as a present-day reality with the expectation that God’s kingdom will progressively grow during this current age. Moreover, the implication of this prayer is that the followers of Jesus will actually participate in kingdom-activity, not only by their prayers but by their work as “witnesses” (Acts 1:8) and as “ambassadors of Christ” (2 Cor. 5:20).

The question surrounding the present-day reality of the kingdom of God is a vital one for all Christians to answer. Generally, there have been two answers: (1) that the kingdom of God is entirely in the future and begins when Jesus Christ reigns in Jerusalem during an earthly millennium; or (2) that the kingdom of God is a present-day reality that is growing and expanding while Jesus Christ reigns at the right hand of God the Father in heaven (cf. Ps. 110:1; Matt. 12:28-29; Rev. 20:1-3). In my opinion, it is the second answer that makes the most sense in the immediate context of Jesus’ instructions about prayer—that the kingdom of God is a present-day reality. Consider the wise and thoughtful exegesis that Dr. Herman Ridderbos puts forward on this subject:

“The question as to what constitutes the great change, viz., the coming of the kingdom which has begun with Jesus’ activity, finds its fundamental and unmistakable answer in the statement made in Matthew 12:28, Luke 11:20. Here Jesus speaks very emphatically of the presence of the kingdom: “If I cast out devils by the Spirit of God (Luke has: ‘with the finger of God’), then the kingdom of God has come unto you.” That the last words of this text must be rendered by the perfect “has come” is pretty well certain, in spite of the criticism of some writers. Apart from the linguistic question, it may be seen from the whole context, especially from what follows in Matthew. Jesus here answers the slander of the Pharisees who had said that he cast out devils by Beelzebub, the prince of devils. He shows the absurdity of the accusation by comparing the power of the devil with that of a kingdom or a town or a house, i.e., with an organically coherent unity. If one devil should cast out another, the kingdom of the devils would not stand but would fall asunder. But this does not happen. That is why there is only one explanation for Jesus’ power over the demons, viz., that by the Spirit (or the finger of God) he was able to cast them out. The opposite to Satan and his kingdom is God and the dominion that is at his disposal, viz., the kingdom of God. Its power and so its presence is the explanation of Jesus’ dominion over the demons. All this is further confirmed in Matthew 12:29 (cf. Mark 3:27) by what is said of the strong man whose house can only be looted after he himself has first been bound. In the same way the casting out of the devils proves the victory over the devil gained by Jesus and thus the break-through by the kingdom of heaven.”

— Herman Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 61-62

Ridderbos offers a “rock-solid” exegetical explanation of the present-day reality of the kingdom of God. He doesn’t just offer his opinion, but he puts forward a clearly articulated defense of the subject based on the exegesis of several scriptural passages. This does not mean that all aspects of the kingdom of God are currently present. But that the kingdom of God “has come” [note the perfect tense of this verb, which refers to a past event but with ongoing results] while we live here on the earth (Matt. 12:28), and that in the future it will be fully consummated. This is a helpful alternative, I believe, to the wrong-headed view that the kingdom of God is entirely in the future. The truth is this–that the kingdom of God is present now during this current age (Mark 1:14-15; Luke 17:20-21), and by grace we who are alive get to participate in its growth and expansion (Matt. 5:14-16; Matt. 13:31-32; 2 Cor. 10:3-6). And that is a great privilege!

Here are four volumes by Herman Ridderbos that I greatly value!

Source: Ridderbos, Herman N. The Coming of the Kingdom. Translated by H. de Jongste. Edited by Raymond O. Zorn. Philadelphia, PA: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1962.

Dr. Marcus J. Serven, ThM and DMin

* * * * * * *

Also, here is a related article on the “this age” and “the age to come” concept:

“This Age” and “the Age to Come”

R. B. Kuiper on Apostolic Succession

November 12, 2025 / Marcus Serven

St. Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh, Scotland. John Knox faithfully served here as Pastor from 1559-1572.

“And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching…” Acts 2:42a

The quote below from R. B. Kuiper’s classic treatise, The Glorious Body of Christ, really resonated with me. He powerfully argues that, “Organizational succession without doctrinal succession is worthless.” Those churches who have departed from the teaching of the Apostles have no real connection to the true Christian faith. They are mere counterfeits and shadows of what our Lord Jesus Christ intended. Let us, then, “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3b). It is only those who have remained faithful to the teachings of the Lord and the Apostles who should be considered as legitimate churches of Jesus Christ.

Certain churches lay claim to apostolicity in the sense of their being exclusively, or nearly so, the uninterrupted continuation of the organized church as it existed in the days of the apostles. Particularly do they boast of their clergy as the unbroken succession of the bishops ordained by the apostles. This view is known as “apostolic succession” and is held by the Greek Catholic, the Roman Catholic and the Anglican churches…One serious fallacy in these claims to apostolic succession is that they completely overlook the fact that organizational succession does not guarantee doctrinal succession. To say nothing of the other communions just named, the Roman Catholic Church has departed very far from the teaching of the apostles. Does it not deny that doctrine which lies at the very heart of apostolic teaching—justification by faith only? For that reason, among others, the Reformers of the sixteenth century did not hesitate to pronounce Rome a false church. Organizational succession without doctrinal succession is worthless. A church that possesses the former but has lost the latter is no longer a church of Jesus Christ. Our Reformed fathers were right when they said that ‘succession of doctrine’ rather than ‘succession of persons and places’ is a mark of the true church. [See Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatiek, Vol. IV, p. 353]”

— R. B. Kuiper, The Glorious Body of Christ, 64-65.

Remember the distinction made in Kuiper’s quote–that the difference between “organizational succession” and “doctrinal succession” is the determining factor between truth and error. It is only faithful “doctrinal succession” that is worth fighting for. Moreover, upholding the “apostles’ teaching” is a mark of the true church of Jesus Christ.

— Dr. Marcus J. Serven

Source: Kuiper, R. B. The Glorious Body of Christ: A Scriptural Appreciation of the One Holy Church. Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1967.

Biographical Statement: Prof. R. B. Kuiper served as the President of Calvin College for 22 years (1930-1952). He then taught at Westminster Theological Seminary for 14 years as the Professor of Practical Theology (1952-1966). He was well-loved for his zeal in teaching the Bible and for the application of its principles to the doctrine of the Church. “Well done good and faithful servant” (cf. Matt. 25:21).

Our First Graduate from the Theological Academy!

September 26, 2025 / Marcus Serven

Here is David Parker receiving his Certificate of Theological Studies. David is our first graduate from the Academy!

Yesterday, I had the special privilege of awarding David Parker his Certificate of Theological Studies from Redeemer Theological Academy! Over the past five years David faithfully completed six classes, along with exams and research papers, plus an extensive comprehensive exam at the conclusion of his studies. He exemplified the picture of a diligent student in his research and writing. I often had to remind him that his research papers did not have to be any longer than ten pages. But, he typically ignored my admonitions and wrote twenty page research papers! He so enjoyed the quest of digging deeper into theological subjects, that his zeal manifested itself in longer than required papers.

The goal of our Certificate of Theological Studies program is to equip the men and women of our congregation for various forms of ministry. We are not endeavoring to become a seminary, but we are a church-based theological education program that prepares our students to serve Jesus Christ in their own unique callings–that may be as Bible teachers (both formal and informal), small group leaders, church officers, missionaries, and evangelists. We offer in-person courses in Bible, Theology, Church History, Apologetics, and Ministry. Not all of our students have chosen to pursue the Certificate program. Each student can choose to audit classes (which have no requirements other than attending classes), or to take classes for credit towards the Certificate. It is your choice. All of our classes are offered free-of-charge.

If you find yourself in Austin, Texas on a Thursday, then feel free to drop by as a guest and see what we are all about. Our current classes are:

“Ecclesiology & Eschatology” (Systematic Theology III) — This class will be taught by Marcus Serven and meet on Thursday mornings [9:30-11:30]. Besides the weekly lectures and handouts, we will read The Glorious Body of Christ by R. B. Kuiper and Christ and the Future by Cornelis Venema. Sept. 18 through Dec. 11.

“The Old Testament Scripture” (Biblical Studies I & II) — This class will be a survey of all 39 books of the Old Testament, their authors and key themes. The class will be taught by Max Smith with readings given out each week—from your Bible and from various websites. It will meet on Thursday afternoons [12:30-2:30] Sept. 18 through Dec. 11.

— Dr. Marcus J. Serven, Director of Redeemer Theological Academy

The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) and the Development of the Nicene Creed

July 23, 2025 / Marcus Serven

“I believe…in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God…” The Nicene Creed (Modern Version)

Written by Dr. Marcus J. Serven

For the past 1,700 years the Nicene Creed has stood as a formidable bulwark against theological heresy. The Christian Church has recited it in our worship services and studied its doctrinal formulations in our theology classes. The first of the Ecumenical Creeds, it set the standard for how we answer the question, “Who is Jesus Christ?” Over time its affirmations have become known as settled doctrine and as a result it has saved many a Christian from being lured into erroneous beliefs about the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us give thanks to God for the theological precision of the Nicene Creed and its careful commitment to the authority of Holy Scripture. Under what circumstances did it come about?

The Historical Context:

Called by Emperor Constantine in AD 325, this council focused on two significant problems within the Church: (1) the Melitian schisms (i.e. the re-admittance of lapsed Christians from the Diocletian persecution), (2) and the Arian crisis (i.e. the rejection of Jesus Christ as the eternal Son of God). The decisions made at the Council of Nicaea proved to be pivotal in answering these two conflicts. Dr. John H. Leith, the noted Church historian, described the context of the Council of Nicaea especially in relation to the Arian crisis in this way:

“The occasion was the dispute concerning the theology of Arius, which raised in acute form the question of the meaning and significance of Jesus Christ. The Christian community had been accustomed to regard him as God as well as man. Arian theology forced the Christian Church to say in what sense he was God. Arius insisted that the Word or Son was a creature, that he was made by God, that he had a beginning, and that he was subject to change. This means, as Athanasius pointed out, that the Son does not have full and accurate knowledge of the Father. In Jesus Christ, man is not really confronted by God. The Nicene Creed insisted that God has fully come into human history in Jesus Christ. It sought to make this clear through certain key phrases in the creed: ‘That is, of the essence of the Father’; ‘True God from true God’; ‘Begotten, not created’; ‘Of one essence [reality] with the Father’.”

— John H. Leith, Creeds of the Churches, 28-29.

Beginning on May 20th, AD 325, the council included three hundred and eighteen representatives of which most were from the Greek-speaking East. The Latin-oriented West was only represented by four or five bishops and two priests from Rome; although Bishop Hosius (AD c.256-357) from Cordova, Spain presided over the entire council. Regarding the question of the “lapsed” (Lat. lapsi), the council determined that these individuals should be restored to fellowship within the church upon the confession of their sin and a demonstration of genuine repentance. Church officers who “lapsed” was a more complicated problem. Generally, it became the practice that they could be restored to fellowship within the Church, but not restored to their former offices.

The second question, however, proved to be much more difficult to resolve. The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was a “little god” who was created by the Father, and therefore was subordinate to the Father. After rigorous debate the council concluded that Jesus Christ was of the “same nature” (Gk. homoousias) as the Father, rather than being of “like nature” (Gk. homoiousias) to the Father. Briefly stated, Jesus was recognized as the eternal Son of God, sharing the same essential nature as God the Father. Arianism was declared to be a heresy. The statement “I and the Father are one” (in John 10:30) was clearly to be understood as a reference to the Father and the Son sharing the “same essential nature.” The Nicene Creed was formed out of this theological disputation and affirmed the doctrine that Jesus Christ was “of the same nature” with the Father.

Eusebius of Caesarea (AD c.265-c.339) submitted a baptismal creed from his own city as a basis for the final form of the creed. Athanasius (AD c.296-373), the great defender of Nicene Christology, attended this council as an assistant to his mentor, Bishop Alexander (d.328) of Alexandria. Arius (c.250-d.336) and his supporters, notably Eusebius of Nicomedia (d.342) also attended the council, but were excommunicated as a result. Arianism, though, remained popular within the Empire until it was finally repudiated at the 1st Council of Constantinople in AD 381. Hence the Creed that we now recite is sometimes referred to as the Niceo-Constantinopolitan Creed. Despite the defeat of Arianism at Constantinople (AD 381), this false system of belief claiming that Jesus Christ “was created” lives on in the heretical teachings of the modern-day Jehovah Witnesses who hold that Jesus Christ was the Father’s first created creature.

Here is a fragment in Greek from the earliest known copy of the Nicene Creed (kept at the John Rylands Library in Manchester, England)

The Development of the Creed:

During the heated debate at the council of Nicaea, Eusebius of Caesarea artfully suggested the adoption of the baptismal creed from his own church as a formula of orthodoxy. The connection between the wording in the baptismal creed of Caesarea and the future Nicene Creed can clearly be seen. The Caesarean Creed reads as follows,

“We believe in one God, the Father All-sovereign, the maker of things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God of God, Light of Light, Life of Life, Son only-begotten, Firstborn of all creation, begotten of the Father before all ages, through whom also all things were made; who was made flesh for our salvation and lived among men, and suffered, and rose again on the third day, and ascended to the Father; We believe also in one Holy Spirit.”

The creed presented by Eusebius was certainly orthodox, but most delegates at the council recognized that it did not deal explicitly with the Arian position—and that was the very issue that must be addressed. Thus, it was taken as a foundational document, and after several additions was put forward by the council in this revised form (additions and alterations are in italics):

“We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign, maker of all things visible and invisible; And in the one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things are made, things in heaven and things on the earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and became man, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended into the heaven, is coming to judge living and dead. And in the Holy Spirit. And those that say ‘There was when he was not,’ and that, ‘He came into being from what-is-not,’ or those that allege, that the son of God is ‘Of another substance or essence’ or ‘created,’ or ‘changeable’ or ‘alterable,’ these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.”

(Both citations are from Bettenson and Mauder, Documents of the Christian Church, 4th Edition, 26-27)

Each one of these three volumes gives the text of the Nicene Creed and speaks to the reasons why it was absolutely necessary to formulate it.

A Theological Analysis of the Nicene Creed:

As time progressed, the anathemas at the end of the Nicene Creed dropped away. The version of the Nicene Creed listed below comes from the text used by Cyril of Jerusalem (AD c.310-386) in his Catechetical Lectures on the theology of the Creed. This version also reflects the additions made at the First Council of Constantinople in AD 381. Note: The text of the Nicene Creed is in quotes; and my theological comments are in bold type.

— “We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign [Gk. pantokratora], maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.” (Affirming that God the Father is the Creator of all things, and rejecting the errors of Gnosticism and the Greek mystery religions that teach there are many so-called “gods” who are only known through a “secret knowledge.”)

— “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten [Gk. monogenes] Son of God,” (Affirming the eternal Sonship of Jesus Christ, and rejecting the false belief of the Ebionites that Jesus was only a deeply spiritual man)

— “Begotten [Gk. gennethenta pro panton ton aionion] of the Father before all the ages,” (Affirming the pre-existence of Jesus Christ, and rejecting the false narrative of the Arians that Jesus was the Father’s first created creature)

— “Light of Light, true God of true God,” [Gk. phos et phosos, Theon alethinon ek Theou alethinou] (Teaching that Jesus Christ is of the same nature and essence [Gk. hypostasis or ousia] of God the Father, and rejecting the false teaching that Jesus was only “like” God but not truly God)

— “begotten not made,” [Gk. gennethenta ou poiethenta] (Affirming the preexistence of Jesus Christ before all time, and denying the false belief of the Arians that there was a time when Jesus Christ “was not”)

— “of one substance with the Father,” [Gk. homoousian to patri] (Essentily teaching that Jesus Christ is “coequal, consubstantial, and coeternal” [from the Confession of Chalcedon in AD 451] with the Father, against the erroneous teaching of Arianism and Eunomianism [a later variant of Arianism in the 4th Century], which asserts that Jesus Christ is only “like” God the Father but not of the same essence [i.e. that the Son of God was subordinate to the Father]. While it is true that Jesus subordinated himself to the Father’s will [cf. Luke 22:42], this in no way takes away any claim to his essential nature of being equal with God the Father [cf. John 1:1-5; 1:14, 18; 5:18; 8:56-59; 10:30-33; 17:1-5; Phil. 2:9-11; Col. 2:9; Heb. 1:1-3])

— “through whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heavens, and was made flesh [Gk. sarkothenta] of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man [Gk. enanthropesanta],” (Stating that Jesus Christ participated in the creation of “all things” in the beginning, and that he “was made flesh…and became man” through the Incarnation by means of the Virgin Birth. These affirmations stood against the errors of Monophysitism [Jesus has only one nature—a divine nature] and Adoptionism [Jesus only became the Son of God at his baptism])

— “and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried,” (Affirming the doctrine of the Substitutionary Atonement by use of the words “was crucified for us,” and denying the erroneous beliefs of the Ebionites [Jesus was merely a teacher, but not a Savior], the Sabellians [Jesus was only the current manifestation of God; i.e. Modalistic Monarchians] who rejected the Trinity, and the Pelagians [Jesus was only an example of righteousness, but not truly a Savior] who rejected the necessity of Jesus’ death for the forgiveness of sins)

— “and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures, and ascended into the heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and cometh again with glory to judge the living and dead, of whose kingdom there shall be no end.” (Teaching the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, and his ascension into Heaven to rule over his Kingdom, and rejecting the Docetists who taught that Jesus only “appeared to be like” God. Note the magisterial progression: “…rose again…ascended…sitteth…cometh again…”)

— “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-giver, that proceedeth from the Father (Affirming the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father [this phrase was added in AD 381 at the 1st Council of Constantinople], and denying the erroneous teaching of the Sabellians that the Holy Spirit was only the “divine will” of the Father rather than the third member of the Trinity)

— (“and the Son”) [Lat. filioque] (The Filioque clause was formally added to the Nicene Creed at the Third Counsel of Toledo in AD 589. It must be acknowledged, however, that well-regarded Church Fathers such as Tertullian, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, and Cyril of Alexandria all affirmed that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and the Son long before Toledo in AD 589. See John 14:26 and 15:26 for context)

— “who with Father and Son is worshipped together and glorified together, who spake by the prophets.” (Teaching that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all worthy of worship, in contrast to the Sabellians [i.e. Modalistic Monarchians] who reject the doctrine of the Trinity)

— “In one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church: We acknowledge one baptism unto remission of sins. We look for a resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come.” (Affirming the true spiritual unity of the Church of Jesus Christ even in times of intense persecution, against the sectarian practices of Montanism [i.e. the visible church must be a pure church] and the followers of Novatian of Rome [Lat. cathari = “the pure ones”] who would not allow any of the “lapsed” to ever rejoin the Church)

(“The Nicene Creed” – the text is cited by Bettenson and Mauder, Documents of the Christian Church, 4th Edition, 27-28)

Its Relevance for Today:

Dr. Mark A. Noll, a contemporary evangelical historian from Regent College, addresses the ongoing relevance of the Nicene Creed by stating,

“The Nicene Creed has remained for nearly seventeen centuries a secure foundation for the church’s theology, worship, and prayer. Not only does it succinctly summarize the facts of biblical revelation, but it also stands as a bulwark against the persistent human tendency to prefer logical deductions concerning what God must be like and how he must act to the lived realities of God’s self-disclosure. And it powerfully restates the realities of Christ’s divine nature, his incarnation as a human being, and the work of salvation he accomplishes for his people. The turning point in Christian history represented by the Nicene Creed was the church’s critical choice for the wisdom of God in preference to human wisdom. Theologically considered, no decision could ever be more important.”

— Mark Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity, 59.

Certainly, the Christian Church should gratefully acknowledge the abundant blessings that have come from the hard-fought debates and thoughtful conclusions that are found in the Nicene Creed. The precise theological formulations contained in it have been recognized over time as settled doctrine. In other words, the affirmations contained in the Nicene Creed are an accurate summary of the teachings of Holy Scripture (i.e orthodoxy = “the right opinion”), and they are a tested means of measuring theological error (i.e. heterodoxy = “differing in opinion”). Over the course of a year it is profitable for all Christians to recite the Nicene Creed in our worship services and to study it in our classes, knowing that previous generations of Bible-believing Christians have clung to its affirmations as we must do as well.

What actually happened at the Council of Nicaea? It would be difficult to find better resources than these three books that go into great detail about its actual proceedings–all are winners!

Resources for Further Study:

Berkhof, Louis. The History of Christian Doctrines. Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1937.

Bettenson, Henry and Chris Maunder, eds. Documents of the Christian Church. Fourth Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Boer, Harry R. A Short History of the Early Church. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1976.

Boyle, Isaac. “A Historical View of the Council of Nice” in The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Grand Rapids, MI: Reprint, Baker Book House, 1992.

Brown, Harold O. J. Heresies: The Image of Christ in the Mirror of Heresy and Orthodoxy from the Apostles to the Present. New York, NY: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1984.

Cunningham, William. Historical Theology. Volume 1. First Published in 1862; Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1960.

Douglas, J. D., gen. ed. The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church. Revised Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

“Adoptianism” by Harold H. Rowdon
“Arianism” by Samuel J. Mikolaski
“Athanasian Creed” by Samuel J. Mikolaski
“Athanasius” by Samuel J. Mikolaski
“Christology” by Samuel J. Mikolaski
“Constantinople, First Council of (381)” by G. T. D. Angel
“Constantine the Great” by David F. Wright
“Docetism” by G. W. Grogan
“Donatists” by David F. Wright
“Ebonites” by H. L. Ellison
“Eusebius of Caesarea” by J. G. G. Norman
“Eusebius of Nicomedia” by Peter Toon
“Gnosticism” by Edwin Yamauchi
“Heresy” by Stephen S. Smalley
“Holy Spirit” by Leon Morris
“Lapsi” by David F. Wright
“Marcion” by W. Ward Gasque
“Martyr, Martyrology” by Ralph P. Martin
“Monarchianism” by Samual J. Mikolaski
“Monophysitism” by George Giacumakis, Jr.
“Monothelites” by H. D. McDonald
“Nicea, Council of (325)” by G. L. Carey
“Nicene Creed” by G. L. Carey
“Nestorianism, Nestorius” by Peter Toon
“Pelagianism” by David F. Wright
“Valentinus” by Clyde Curry Smith

Kelly, John N. D. Early Christian Doctrines. Second Edition. New York, NY: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1958.

Lane, Anthony N. S. A Concise History of Christian Thought. Revised Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006.

Leith, John H. Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Christian Doctrine from the Bible to the Present. Third Edition. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1982.

Morecraft III, Joseph C. 2,000 Years of Christian Theology. San Antonio, TX: The Vision Forum, Inc., 2012.

Noll, Mark A. Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1997.

Rushdoony, Rousas John. The Foundations of Social Order: Studies in the Creeds and Councils of the Early Church. Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 1968.

Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom. 3 Volumes. Sixth Edition. Revised by David S. Schaff, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998.

Seeberg, Reinhold. Text-Book of the History of Doctrines. Translated by Charles E. Hay. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1952.

Here are three additional volumes that analyze the Nicene Creed in much broader terms–(1) how it confronts damnable heresies, (2) how it solves political struggles, and (3) how it challenges Greek philosophical presuppositions.

Dr. Marcus J. Serven, ThM and DMin

Cornelis Venema on “The Session of Christ”

June 6, 2025 / Marcus Serven

“The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool’.” Psalm 110:1

Over the past two weeks as I was preparing to preach on the Ascension of Jesus Christ into heaven (Acts 1:4-11), I came across these two very fine quotes from Dr. Cornelis Venema on “The Session of Christ.” Essentially, the term “Session” (Lat. sessio = a sitting) refers to how Jesus Christ now reigns in heaven over the Kingdom of God here on earth. When Jesus ascended into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God, he not only finished his public ministry (as a Prophet), completed his saving work on the Cross (as a Priest), but he also began to reign over his kingdom (as a King). Moreover, during this time between the resurrection of Christ and the return of Christ the Kingdom of God is growing and expanding (Matt. 13:31-33; Matt. 16:18). In addition, Christ’s enemies are being defeated and the gospel message is spreading throughout the entire world (Matt. 12:29; Luke 10:17-18; John 12:31-32). There may be times of discouragement in life when we lose all hope and can’t see it’s growth. Yet the promise of the Bible is that the Kingdom of God is “in the midst” of us (Luke 17:20-21). Dr. Venema capably expands on these thoughts with these two quotes:

“Just as Christ fulfills all of the Old Testament promises (2 Cor. 1:20), Christ also guarantees the future consummation of all God’s promises by his resurrection from the dead, session at the Father’s right hand, and outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. These events are disclosed in the New Testament as end-time events, that is, events which mark a decisive turning point in history. These events signal that Christ has been given all authority in heaven and on earth and will reign until all things have been subject to him, including death, the last enemy (1 Cor. 15:25-26). By his resurrection from the dead, Christ has become the ‘first fruits’ of all who will through union with him share in his victory. By his session at the Father’s hand, Christ has been given the keys to unlock God’s plan for history until he is revealed at the ‘last day.’ And by his outpouring of the Holy Spirit, he has entered into the last and most decisive epoch in his church-gathering work which, once completed, will serve to prepare all things for his coming again.”

— Venema, The Promise of the Future, 8-9

Dr. Venema further explains,

“The biblical revelation regarding the future, therefore, always fixes our attention upon Christ. Just as God’s ways with his people in history in times past have all met in Christ, so all of his ways in the future will meet in Christ. The great event on the horizon of the future, in biblical perspective, is accordingly the event of Christ’s return or ‘Second Coming’. This event is the great future toward which all history is moving. It is the event that gives meaning to present history and which will consummate God’s work of redemption. the entirety of the biblical teaching about the future is intimately linked to the coming of Christ at the end of the present age.”

— Venema, The Promise of the Future, 9

These words–and all of the Scripture passages that back them up–give me hope. All that Jesus said would happen regarding his death and resurrection have come to pass. And now that he reigns over his kingdom (i.e. in his “Session”) we can be confident that it will be fully consummated upon his return. Alleluia!

— Dr. Marcus J. Serven

Resources for Further Study:

Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 1st Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984.

“Ascension of Christ” by Alexander Ross
“Kingdom of Christ, God, Heaven” by George E. Ladd
“Millennium, Views of the” by Robert G. Clouse
“Offices of Christ” by Robert L. Reymond
“Session” by David H. Wheaton
“States of Jesus Christ” by Wayne A. Grudem

Venema, Cornelis P. The Promise of the Future. Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2000.

Venema, Cornelis P. “The Four Main Millennial Views” in These Last Days: A Christian View of History. Edited by Richard D. Phillips and Gabriel N. E. Fluhrer. Co-Published by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals (Philadelphia, PA); and P&R Publishing (Phillipsburg, NJ), 2011.

Note: There was a technical problem when I posted my sermon a few days ago and it was not mailed out to my subscribers. You can find it here with this link: A Sermon: “The Glories of Christ’s Ascension” Acts 1:4-11

A Sermon: “The Glories of Christ’s Ascension” Acts 1:4-11

June 4, 2025 / Marcus Serven

Written by Dr. Marcus J. Serven

“And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight.” Acts 1:9

Just last week on Ascension Day (May 29, 2025) I had the opportunity to preach at our church, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) here in Austin, TX. We have four pastors at Redeemer, and since I am the one who is “semi-retired” I usually preach once or twice a year. Instead, my role at the church is focused on teaching. I regularly instruct adults in our School of Discipleship classes on Sunday mornings. Beyond that, I am the director of Redeemer Theological Academy teaching college-level courses in Biblical studies, Systematic Theology, and Church History. This suits me quite well, and I am grateful to focus my energies on teaching at this point in life. Nonetheless, below is an audio file of my recent sermon. Also, you will find an introduction to the text and my notes.

* * * * * * * * * *

Introduction: The Ascension of Jesus Christ into Heaven is often overlooked. We take note of Jesus’ birth on Christmas day, his betrayal on Maundy Thursday, his death on Good Friday, and his bodily resurrection on Easter Sunday. But somehow the Ascension gets passed by with barely a notice. Why is this particular event in the life of Jesus so important? Here are a few thoughts to consider: When Jesus ascends into Heaven (1) it is the fulfillment of the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit; (2) it is the formal establishment of the Kingdom of God (not a physical Kingdom, but a spiritual one); (3) it is the beginning of Jesus’ role as an intercessor for his people; (4) it is the acceptance of Jesus’ atoning work by the Father; and (5) it is a pledge that Jesus will return in the same way in which he departed. Thus, the Ascension is like “a hinge” upon which all of these events swing. Let us, then, acknowledge the glorious significance of Jesus’ ascent into Heaven.

Here is my outline plus a few of the additional Bible verses that I referred to in this sermon:

1. The Promise of the Holy Spirit, (vs. 4-5) — Luke 24:49; John 14:26 and 16:7

2. The Establishment of the Kingdom of God, (vs. 6-7) — Amos 9:11: Luke 17:20-21

3. The Beginning of Jesus’ Role as an Intercessor, (vs. 8) — Hebrews 7:25 and 9:24

4. The Acceptance of Jesus’ Saving Work, (vs. 9) — 1 Timothy 3:16; Psalm 110:1; 1 John 2:1

5. The Pledge of Jesus’ Future Return, (vs. 10-11) — Luke 24:30-31; Matthew 24:30-31; Daniel 7:13-14

Here is an audio file of my sermon: I hope you enjoy it!

— Rev. Dr. Marcus J. Serven

These three volumes really blessed me in my sermon preparation–they have great insights!

J. I. Packer on Propitiation

April 12, 2025 / Marcus Serven

“He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” 2 Cor. 5:21 (NASB)

Just recently I came across a very fine quote from Dr. J. I. Packer that I had copied out of his book, Knowing God, quite a long time ago. Packer sets forth–in classic Reformed style–the doctrine of propitiation in the sacrificial work of Jesus Christ. The word propitiation (Gk. hilasterion = to conciliate, appease, expiate) refers to the satisfaction of the wrath of God through the death of Christ (See: Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 1 Jn. 2:2; 1 Jn. 4:10). In short, Jesus becomes sin for his people and satisfies the divine wrath of our Holy God. In addition, he gives to them his righteousness in a “double imputation” (i.e. our sins are imputed to Him, and His righteousness is imputed to us). Consider Packer’s explanation of propitiation:

“The basic description of the saving death of Christ in the Bible is as a propitiation, that is, as that which quenched God’s wrath against us by obliterating our sins from His sight. God’s wrath is His righteousness reacting against our unrighteousness; it shows retributive justice. But Jesus Christ has shielded us from the nightmare prospect of retributive justice, in obedience to His Father’s will, and receiving the wages of sin in our place. By this means justice has been done, for the sins of all that will ever be pardoned were judged and punished in the person of God the Son, and it is on this basis that pardon is now offered to us offenders. Redeeming love and retributive justice joined hands, so to speak, at Calvary, for there God showed Himself to be ‘just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus.’ Do you understand this? If you do, you are now seeing to the very heart of the Christian gospel.”

— Dr. J. I. Packer, Knowing God, 170

Packer’s quote is an excellent reminder to us of the redemptive work that Jesus Christ accomplishes for the sake of his people. The Apostle Paul puts it this way, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us–for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree'” (Gal. 3:13). Therefore, let us give praise and thanks to Almighty God for sending forth his Son to do for us what we could not do for ourselves. Jesus, by his sacrificial work on the Cross, makes it possible for us to escape the retributive justice of God and live as those who have been redeemed. Soli Deo Gloria!

— Dr. Marcus J. Serven

Here are three books by Dr. J. I. Packer that I treasure. Each one of them is great–but, Knowing God is preeminent!

Sources:

Abbott-Smith, G. A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament. Edinburgh, Scotland: T. & T. Clark Ltd., 1981.

Packer, James I. Knowing God. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973.

The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible

January 28, 2025 / Marcus Serven

John Wycliffe’s Bible – Translation completed in AD 1382

Written by Dr. Marcus J. Serven

“For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit…” Hebrews 4:12a

Introduction:

What does the Bible say about itself? To me, this is a fascinating question because it’s answer demonstrates the firm foundation that our faith rests upon—the self-authenticating nature of the Bible. Simply stated, we believe that God has revealed Himself in the Holy Scriptures. This would be in contrast to God only revealing Himself in the created world (i.e. General Revelation). Instead, the Word of God asserts that the Lord has specifically revealed Himself in the sixty-six books of the Bible (i.e. Special Revelation). Thus, the Bible is more than a book of ancient writings, it is the very Word of God (Lat. Verbum Dei). In this respect, it differs from every other book that has ever been written. It is the Word of the Lord.

The Bible’s Testimony About Itself:

It is good for us to recall that the Bible contains God’s very own words (i.e. Verbal Plenary Inspiration), and that these words demonstrate the self-authenticating and self-attesting nature of the Bible. Consider these following citations from the Bible where it talks about itself (the italics are mine):

— In numerous citations throughout the Bible it says, “Thus saith the LORD.” This phrase is repeated 415 times in the Old Testament (King James Version). For example, see the following passages: Exodus 8:1; Joshua 24:2; 2 Samuel 12:7 where it is used. The expression “Thus saith the LORD” signifies that the words in the Bible are God’s very own words, and not merely the words of men.

— Deuteronomy 29:29 “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.”

— Deuteronomy 30:11-14 (vs. 14) “But the word is very near to you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.”

— Psalm 19:7-10 “The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.”

— Psalm 119:105 “Your Word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.”

— Isaiah 40:8 “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.”

— Isaiah 55:10-11 “…so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.”

— Isaiah 66:2b “But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and who trembles at my word.”

— Jeremiah 23:29 “Is not my word like fire, declares the LORD, and like hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?”

— There are numerous citations throughout the New Testament that read, “It is written…” signifying, (1) that the Old and the New Testaments are unified in their essential message (i.e there is continuity and not discontinuity); (2) that the Holy Scriptures are God’s Word and are therefore authoritative; (3) that Christianity is a historical faith built upon the prophetic utterances of the past that have now been fulfilled; and (4) that the Church in this present age can be instructed and encouraged by Prophets of the past. For example, “They told him, ‘In Bethlehem of Judea, for so it is written by the prophet’: ‘And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.’” (Referencing the prophesy of Micah 5:2)

— Matthew 5:17-18 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”

— Matthew 24:35 “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.”

— Luke 11:28 “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

— Luke 24:25-27 “And he said to them, ‘O foolish one, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?’ And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.”

— Luke 24:44-48 “Then he said to them, ‘These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.’ Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, ‘Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things.’”

— John 5:39 “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me…”

— John 10:35b “…and Scripture cannot be broken.” (Jesus quotes from Ps. 82:6)

— John 17:17 “Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.”

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

— 2 Timothy 2:9 “But the word of God is not bound!”

— 2 Timothy 3:15 “…and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.”

— 2 Timothy 3:16-17 “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”

— Hebrews 4:12-13 “For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give an account.”

— 2 Peter 1:19-21 “And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

— 2 Peter 3:15-16 “…just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.”

By Scripture Alone:

As Christians our belief in the authority of the Bible is central to our faith. The Reformation rallying-cry, “Scripture Alone” (i.e. Sola Scriptura) well expresses this essential commitment. This means that the Bible is the sole source of God’s special revelation; it contains the Law, the Gospel, and principles for how we should live, worship, and think. John Wycliffe was the first Englishman to push forward the notion that the Bible should be translated into the common language of the people. James Wiley, a famous historian of the Reformation, wrote, “What Wycliffe did in the field of theology was not to compile a system, but to give a plain exposition of Scripture; to restore to the eyes of men, from whom they had long been hidden, those truths which are for the healing of their souls. He left it for those who should come after him to formulate the doctrines which he deduced from the inspired page.” (Wiley, The History of Protestantism, Vol. I, 128)

Roughly 140 years later, Martin Luther based his whole argument for the Gospel at the Diet of Worms (April 21, 1521) on the phrase, “My conscience is captive to the Word of God.” Thus, the affirmation “Scripture Alone” (i.e. Sola Scriptura) is commonly referred to as the “formal principle” of the Reformation (Isa. 40:8; Jn. 5:39, 10:35; 2 Tim. 3:14-17, Heb. 4:12-13). This belief represents the concept that the Bible is absolutely foundational to the Christian life. To illustrate this thought, when Luther was asked about the success of the Reformation, he confidently stated, “I simply taught, preached, wrote God’s Word; otherwise I did nothing. And then, while I slept, or drank Wittenberg beer with my Philip and my Amsdorf, the Word so greatly weakened the papacy that never a prince or emperor did such damage to it. I did nothing. The Word did it all” (Quoted by Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers, 2nd Edition, 55). Luther’s bold statement demonstrates the power and authority of the Word of God to convict individuals of their sins, to transform human lives, and to sustain God’s people in the midst of the trials and tribulations of this earth.

A few years later the English reformer William Tyndale went even further by stating that “It was impossible to establish the lay people in any truth, except the Scripture were plainly laid before their eyes in their mother tongue.” With this vision burning in his heart, Tyndale was indefatigable in his efforts. Due to numerous threats upon his life, Tyndale fled to the Dutch Republic and to Southern Germany to continue his work. First, he translated the New Testament which was published in 1526. Secondly, he translated the books of the Pentateuch and published them in 1530. Ever watchful for the secret agents of Henry VIII, he arranged for copies of his translations to be smuggled into England hidden in bales of fabric imported into England. Through overwhelming odds he persevered in his work, but was eventually betrayed by a fellow Englishman and executed in 1536. His last words were, “Lord, open the eyes of the King of England!” This prayer was answered not long after his death when Henry VIII softened to the need for a fresh translation of the Bible. Tyndale’s associate, Miles Cloverdale, helped to produce the Great Bible (1539) which was distributed to every parish in England. Much of the text came from the work of William Tyndale.

Finally, consider what the writers of the Westminster Larger Catechism stated about their belief in the Divine nature of Holy Scripture with the following question and answer: “Question #4: How doth it appear that the Scriptures are the Word of God? Answer: The Scriptures manifest themselves to be the Word of God, by their majesty and purity; by the consent of all the parts, and the scope of the whole, which is to give all glory to God; by their light and power to convince and convert sinners, to comfort and build up believers unto salvation: but the Spirit of God bearing witness by and with the Scriptures in the heart of man, is alone able fully to persuade it that they are the very Word of God.” (Westminster Larger Catechism, Question #4)

Each one of these historical examples–John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, and the Westminster Assembly–demonstrate the whole-hearted commitment that Protestants have made toward the centrality of Holy Scripture. Simply stated, the written Word is the primary means that the Lord has used to bring forth the Gospel. This is why the overwhelming majority of Protestants put a priority upon reading, preaching, and teaching the Scriptures.

Views on the Inspiration of Scripture:

Over the centuries Christians have formulated differing views on the inspiration of Scripture. In some ways, it could be stated that a few of these “views” are not even Christian at all; since they reject the full inspiration of the Scriptures. Other views reflect the genuine struggles of sincere Christians to better understand the nature of the Bible. Here are the five most common views of the inspiration of Scripture throughout history:

Natural — no supernatural element is involved; the Bible was written by men of great genius and ability. This view denies God’s activity of inspiring the Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles and therefore must be rejected.
Conceptual — the concepts, but not the actual words, are inspired. This view allows human beings to pick and choose which concepts are inspired and which are not. In essence, man stands over the Bible and makes judgments as to what is inspired or is merely the opinion of men. Therefore, this view of inspiration must be rejected as capricious, erroneous, and unreliable.
Partial or Fallible Inspiration — the Bible is inspired, but it contains errors. In particular, those who endorse this position question the Bible’s complete accuracy especially in regard to the length of creation days, the reality of Adam and Eve as the first man and woman, the nature of the Fall and the imputation of sin, the likelihood of a world-wide flood, the age of the patriarchs, various numbers that are recorded in the Old Testament historical books, the on-going nature of headship and submission in male/female relationships, and various selected miracles. This view is entirely subjective and it undermines the authority of Holy Scripture. The Bible stands above human culture and is not subject to all of the ever-changing attitudes of human society. Therefore, this view must be rejected.
Dictation or Mechanical — the writers of the Scriptures were passive instruments in God’s hand, like typewriters on which He wrote. This view, however, fails to recognize that the personal circumstances of the writers of Holy Scripture are also included in the text of the Bible. Admittedly, certain parts of the Bible were dictated, such as the “Ten Commandments” and “The Lord’s Prayer.” The majority of the Bible, though, demonstrates how the Lord spoke through the individual writers. For example, Job’s despair, Moses’ leadership struggles, David’s repentance, Mary’s wonder, Peter’s failures, and Paul’s humility. Each person is shown in a true and unvarnished light, and this adds to the credibility of the Bible.
Verbal, Plenary — the very words (Verbal) and all of them (Plenary) are inspired by God and written by men. There are no errors in the original autographs of the Bible (Inerrancy). However, it is admitted that those who have copied the Bible have made errors in the manuscripts; but these are minor in scope and do not effect the trustworthy character of the Bible. The Verbal Plenary Inspiration of the Bible is the historic position of Christians throughout the ages. This view correctly upholds the authority and inspiration of the Word of God.

Three Key Passages:

Both the Apostles’ Paul and Peter address the subject of inspiration. Clearly, they affirm the doctrine of the Verbal Plenary Inspiration of the Bible. Consider these three passages and what they say about the Bible.

#1 — 2 Timothy 3:16-17 “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”

In essence, the Bible says of itself that it is fully “inspired” by God, or literally “God-breathed” (Gk. theopneustos). This clearly states that God fully participated in the writing of the Bible. Moreover, that the Bible is profitable for “teaching” (Gk. didaskalian), for “reproof” (Gk. elegmon), for “correction” (Gk. epanorthosin), and for “training” (Gk. paideian). With the end goal being that Christians are “equipped for every good work” by the teaching that is contained in the Bible. This is why the Apostle Paul can write elsewhere, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom” (Col. 3:16).

#2 — 2 Timothy 4:9-13 “Do your best to come to me soon. For Demas, in love with this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica. Crescens has gone to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. Luke alone is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry. Tychicus I have sent to Ephesus. When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments.”

Note that this passage demonstrates that the individual personalities, styles, and challenging circumstances of the human authors are part of the Scriptures as well. None of the trials and difficulties of the people of God are hidden from the reader of the Bible. This fact should give us confidence that the Bible is not presenting an unrealistic portrait of the Christian life. This is why Jesus’ words are comforting to so many people—“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matt. 11: 28-30) Jesus came to minister to “sinners.” (cf. Matt. 9:12-13)

#3 — 2 Peter 1:19-21 “And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

The Apostle Peter testifies to the fact that, “…no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation.” In fact, the Bible uniformly condemns false prophets throughout its pages by applying the simple test of “if the word does not come to pass or come true” then “the LORD has not spoken” (Deut. 8:22). Scriptures were written by “…men spoke from God.” It can be safely stated that the Bible has one author—the Holy Spirit; yet the human writers were “carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:21). The position of the Church throughout the centuries has been to accept the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Bible. This means that each word is inspired by God, and that all of them together are important to us. The full value of the Bible’s meaning can be obtained through careful study and prayer.

The Authority of the Bible:

Biblical authority is based upon the fact that God has given us these words. Man is not the judge over Scripture, but Scripture is the judge over man. Hence, either by direct statements, or by the principles that are contained in the Bible we can be confident that we are receiving God’s truth. These statements and principles can be applied to every human circumstance with confidence in knowing that the counsel received is from God himself. When we encounter passages that we do not understand then we follow the practice of having “the Bible interpret the Bible” (i.e. the Analogy of Faith). In other words, we shed light on the more difficult passages, by applying the meaning of the easier passages to them. Dr. Harold Lindsell notes, “Apparent discrepancies are no more than that. Additional information in a thousand instances has proven that the Bible’s critics were wrong.” As time progresses, it is fascinating to note the Bible remains as a trusted repository of eternal truth. Man’s “truth” is based on the shifting sands of opinion and presuppositions. Yet, as the Prophet Isaiah proclaims, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever” (Isa. 40:8).

Dr. Cornelius Van Til of Westminster Theological Seminary gives a fine summary of the doctrine of Biblical authority in the following quote:

“The Bible is thought of as authoritative on everything of which is speaks. Moreover, it speaks of everything. We do not mean that it speaks of football games, of atoms, etc. directly, but we do mean that it speaks of everything either directly or by implication. It not only tells us of the Christ and his work, but also tells us who God is and where the universe about us has come from. It tells us about theism as well as about Christianity. It gives us a philosophy of history as well as history. Moreover, the information on these subjects is woven into an inextricable whole. It is only if you reject the Bible as the Word of God that you can separate the so-called religious and moral instruction of the Bible from what it says, e.g. about the physical universe. This view of Scripture, therefore, involves the idea that there is nothing in this universe on which human beings can have full and true information unless they take the Bible into account. We do not mean, of course, that one must go to the Bible rather than to the laboratory if one wishes to study the anatomy of the snake. But if one goes only to the laboratory and not also to the Bible, one will not have a full and even true interpretation of the snake.”

— Van Til, Christian Apologetics, 19-20

Inerrancy, Infallibility, and Perspicuity:

There are three significant concepts that fit underneath the broad belief that Christians have in the authority of the Bible. They are inerrancy, infallibility, and perspicuity—what do they mean? The term inerrancy refers to how the sixty-six books of the Bible are free from error in all that is taught (e.g. factual, historical, and spiritual truth). The related term, infallibility, refers to how the writers of the Bible could not err since they were inspired by the Holy Spirit (Jn. 17:17; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:19-21). Christians from many differing backgrounds teach that the Bible is infallible in faith and practice. Moreover, that the central message of the Bible is easy to understand; and this is called perspicuity. It must be admitted that various translations of the Bible may contain errors, according to the level of skill with which the translators did their work–but the original autographs do not err. This gives the Christian a confidence in the authority of the Bible. Moreover, it urges us to work hard to properly interpret the Bible by using the time-proven principles of biblical interpretation.

Conclusion:

In brief, it can be resolutely affirmed that the Bible is inspired, authoritative, inerrant, infallible, perspicuous, and sufficient. Through out the centuries of human civilization there have been many hostile critics of the Bible. But, the Bible has withstood all of these attacks and remained as the standard of objective truth in the midst of ever-changing subjectivism. We can thank God that we have a firm foundation upon which to build our faith. As the Psalmist states, “Your Word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Ps. 119:105). Soli Deo Gloria!

These four books have been an immense help to me over the years. Each one is worthy of purchase and having in your own library

Resources for Further Study:

Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982.

Berkhof, Louis. Manual of Christian Doctrine. Second Edition. Arlington Heights, IL: Christian Liberty Press, 2003.

Boice, James Montgomery, ed. The Foundations of Biblical Authority. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Bruce, Frederick Fivey. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Academic, 1988.

Bruce, Frederick Fivey. The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th Edition. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1960.

Comfort, Philip Wesley, ed. The Origin of the Bible:. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1992.

Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984. See the following articles: “Analogy of Faith” “Bible, Authority of” “Bible, Canon of” “Bible, Inerrancy and Infallibility of” “Bible, Inspiration of” “Interpretation of the Bible” “Plenary Inspiration” “Verbal Inspiration.”

Harris, R. Laird. Inspiration and Canonicity of the Scriptures. Revised Edition. Greenville, SC: A Press, 1995.

Lindsell, Harold. The Battle for the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

Geisler, Norman L., ed. Inerrancy. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

Geisler, Norman L. and William E. Nix. From God to Us: How We Got Our Bible. Chicago. IL: The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, 1974.

George, Timothy. Theology of the Reformers. Second Edition. Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2013.

McDowell, Josh. Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Two Volumes. San Bernardino, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ, 1972 (Vol. 1) and 1975 (Vol. 2).

Pache, Rene. The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture. Translated by Helen I. Needham. Chicago, IL: The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, 1969.

Sproul, R. C. Scripture Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2005.

Van Til, Cornelius. Christian Apologetics. Second Edition. Edited by William Edgar. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2003.

Warfield, Benjamin B. “The Westminster Confession and the Original Autographs” in Selected Shorter Writings. Vol. 2. Edited by John Meeter. Phillipsburg, NJ: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1973.

Warfield, Benjamin Breckinridge. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Samuel G. Craig, ed. Phillipsburg, NJ: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1948.

Wylie, James A. The History of Protestantism. 3 Volumes. Kilkeel, N. Ireland: Mourne Missionary Trust, 1990.

Young, Edward J. Thy Word is Truth: Some Thoughts on the Biblical Doctrine of Inspiration. Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, Reprint, 1957.

These four volumes might be a bit more difficult to read, but they are all extraordinarily valuable. I recommend them all for your study and reflection!

Dr. Marcus J. Serven, ThM and DMin

J. I. Packer on God’s School of Holiness

October 1, 2024 / Marcus Serven

“You shall be holy, for I am holy.” 1 Peter 1:16

I found myself strongly moved by this quote on the doctrine of sanctification by Dr. J. I. Packer. Read it for yourself and see if it ministers to you as it did for me.

“In God’s school of holiness our Lord Jesus Christ (the Father’s Son and the Christian’s Savior) is with us, and we with him, in a controlling relationship of master and servant, leader and follower, teacher and student. It is crucially important to appreciate this. Why is it that in the school of holiness, as in the schools to which we send our own children, some move ahead faster than others? How are the different rates of progress to be explained? Fundamentally, the factor that makes the difference is neither one’s intelligence quotient, nor the number of books one has read nor the conferences, camps and seminars one has attended, but the quality of the fellowship with Christ that one maintains through life’s vicissitudes. Jesus is risen. He is alive and well. Through his word and Spirit he calls us to himself today, to receive him as our Savior and Lord and become his disciples and followers. Speaking objectively—with reference to how things really are, as distinct from how they might feel at any particular moment—the “there-ness” of Jesus, and the personal nature of his relationship with us as his disciples, are as truly matters of fact as were his bodily presence and his words of comfort and command when he walked this earth long ago. Some, however, do not reckon with this fact as robustly and practically as others do. That is what makes the difference.”

— J. I. Packer, Rediscovering Holiness, 17-18

Essentially, Dr. Packer asserts that the predominant element in our sanctification is the fellowship that we enjoy with the living Lord. We can have every confidence in knowing that our relationship with Christ is secure, and we thank God for that! We need to realize, however, that our fellowship with Him waxes and wanes throughout the course of our life. This is why “the ‘there-ness’ of Jesus, and the personal nature of his relationship with us as his disciples, are as truly matters of fact as were his bodily presence and his words of comfort and command when he walked this earth long ago.” Praise be to God for Dr. Packer’s stirring words!

Moreover, the Lord does not leave us bereft of resources to strengthen us for the trials and tribulations of this world. He gives us a number of significant resources and remedies (i.e. the “means of grace”) to encourage us in our fellowship with Him. These “means of grace” are: (1) the Word of God; (2) the Sacraments (in particular our ongoing participation in the Lord’s Supper); and (3) the practice of prayer (See: Westminster Shorter Catechism #88). Each one of these “means of grace” are beneficial remedies to depression, despair, and discouragement. Each one is a spiritual discipline that we should cultivate for our own good. God has given them to us so that we can be strong and resilient Christians. By faith, let us make the effort. I believe you will be glad you did!

— Dr. Marcus J. Serven

Category: Theology (Page 1 of 5)

The Doctrine of the Trinity

Introduction:

Biblical Texts that support the Doctrine of the Trinity:

Confessional Reconnaissance:

An Economic View of the Trinity:

Key Quotes:

Conclusion:

Resources for Further Study:

Is the Kingdom of God a Present-day Reality?

R. B. Kuiper on Apostolic Succession

Our First Graduate from the Theological Academy!

The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) and the Development of the Nicene Creed

The Historical Context:

The Development of the Creed:

A Theological Analysis of the Nicene Creed:

Its Relevance for Today:

Resources for Further Study:

Cornelis Venema on “The Session of Christ”

Resources for Further Study:

Note: There was a technical problem when I posted my sermon a few days ago and it was not mailed out to my subscribers. You can find it here with this link: A Sermon: “The Glories of Christ’s Ascension” Acts 1:4-11

A Sermon: “The Glories of Christ’s Ascension” Acts 1:4-11

J. I. Packer on Propitiation

The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible

Introduction:

The Bible’s Testimony About Itself:

By Scripture Alone:

Views on the Inspiration of Scripture:

Three Key Passages:

The Authority of the Bible:

Inerrancy, Infallibility, and Perspicuity:

Conclusion:

Resources for Further Study:

J. I. Packer on God’s School of Holiness

Recent Posts

Categories

Pages

Archives

Categories