Top Ten R.C. Sproul Lectures

These would certainly be very helpful to listen through.  Check it out.

God’s Will and Your Vocation

Ligonier Ministries:

How can you be sure that the work you are doing is what God wants? Learn the biblical guidelines in Romans 12 as you seek God’s will.

A Huge Blow to Moral Relativism

R.C. Sproul:

One of the things that I am grateful for as a consequence of the tragedy that befell the United States on 9/11 is something we began to hear on television. Suddenly it was politically acceptable for the media to speak of real, objective evil. Indeed, when I watched the buildings implode, I knew we had marked a turning point of moral relativism in American history. The events of 9/11 were a mortal blow to relativism, because the response of Americans and the response of people the world over, after looking at this heinous attack on human life, was the very “unrelativistic” declaration that “This is evil.” 

Recently I saw that same affirmation made by a national news service, where a headline bulletin on the screen proclaimed, “The end of moral relativism.” One cannot have such a shocking encounter with pure evil and walk away, saying, “Well, it’s a relative thing.”

Read the rest.

(HT:  Crossway Blog)

What It's Like Pastoring Alongside R.C. Sproul

Great wisdom here.

Q and A with Mark Driscoll, R.C. Sproul, Matt Chandler, and Tullian T.

(RSS might need to click through)

Presuming Grace

R.C. Sproul:

I wonder if we really are amazed by grace? I think we express more amazement at God's wrath than at His mercy. We've come to the place, I think, in our religious thinking where we assume that God will be merciful, that God will be kind, that God will be gracious, and so we're not surprised whenever we experience His kindness. . . .

One of my favorite illustrations about the dilemma that we face with respect to understanding God's mercy goes back to the early days of my career as a teacher in college and seminary. One of my first teaching assignments was to teach 250 freshmen a required course on "Introduction to the Old Testament." Here I had 250 students assembled in a large lecture hall, very uncomfortable, trying to communicate with so many students at one time. I had to print up in advance the requirements for the course because I'd already learned, very quickly, that college students are all budding Philadelphia lawyers. You have to "dot your i's and cross your t's" to make sure that the assignments are clearly set forth. I gave them a published syllabus and told them what their requirements would be. I said, "We have three very small papers, book report type things, that are required during this semester. The first one is due at noon on September 30, the on second October 30, and the third on November 30. Now here's the way it goes: I want these finished, on my desk at 12:00 noon on the appointed times unless you are physically confined to the hospital or the infirmary or there is a death in the immediate family." We had to spell out all this sort of thing for the college students. I said, "Does everybody understand the assignment?" They said, "Oh, yes indeed."

So, September 30 came around and 225 of my students brought their papers in and presented them dutifully at the proper time. 25 of these poor souls had failed to complete their assignments and they were scared to death. These were freshmen, just making the transition from high school and they were in a posture of abject humility. They said, "Oh Professor Sproul, please don't give us an 'F' for this grade." I had told them that if they didn't get their paper in on time they would get an "F" for that assignment. They said, "Please give us some more time, give us one more chance." They were begging me for grace, for mercy. They wanted an extension. I said, "Okay, I'll give you an extension. But don't let it happen again. Remember the next assignment is October 30. I want those papers on time." They said, "Absolutely. They will be there."

October 30 came around. 200 of my students came and put their term papers on my desk. 50 of them were now assembled outside in terror because they hadn't planned their time properly, and were not prepared. So once again these students came to me pleading. They said, "Oh Professor, we didn't budget our time properly. It's mid-term, we have so many assignments all coming in at the same time, so many pressures, it's Homecoming. Please give us just one more chance." They begged me with earnest faces and I was a soft-hearted guy and I said, "Okay, okay. I'll give you one more chance, but don't let it happen again." You know what they did? They began to sing spontaneously, "We love you Prof. Sproul, oh yes we do." So I was the most popular professor in the school for 30 days.

But 30 days later the third paper came due. This time 150 students came into the classroom with their papers prepared and the other 100 came in as casual, as cavalier, as you can imagine. They didn't have their papers, they weren't worried in the slightest, and I said to them, "Where are you term papers?" They said, "Hey Prof, don't worry about it. We'll have it for you in a couple of days, no sweat." I stopped them right there in their tracks and I took out that dreadful little black book and I took out my pen and I said, "Johnson, where's your term paper?" He said, "I don't have it Professor." So I wrote an "F" in the book. "Greenwood, where's your paper?" "I don't have it, sir." I put "F" in the book. What do you think was the response of those students? Unmitigated fury. In one voice they called out, "THAT'S NOT FAIR!"

I said, "What was that? Johnson, did I just hear you say that's not fair?" He said, "Yes, that's not fair." He was furious. I said, "Okay. I don't ever want to be thought of as being unfair or unjust. Johnson, it's justice that you want?" He said, "Yes!" I said, "Okay, if I recall, you were late the last time, weren't you?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Okay. I'll go back and change that grade to an 'F'." So I erased his passing grade and gave him an "F." I said, "Is there anybody else that wants justice?" Nobody wanted justice. Do you see what has happened here? The first time they were pleading with me in utter, pathetic humility, and I said sure. The second time they begged. By the third time, not only did they begin to assume mercy, but they began to demand it. They assumed now that I was obligated to be gracious to them.

Friends, that's what we do with God.

(HT:  Dane Ortlund)

The Journey to Mount Moriah

R.C. Sproul:

I find it difficult, if not impossible, to get inside the head of Abraham on his journey to Mount Moriah. I have never had the experience of being called to slay my son for the glory of God. The closest thing to it in my own experience pales into insignificance by comparison. It occurred not with my son, but with my dog.

Read the rest.

I remember hearing Dr. Sproul tell this story on an old Ligonier cassette tape that I had. I wish I still had that. If anyone knows how to get ahold of a digital version, paste a link in the comments. It is very moving.

(HT:  Tim Challies)

"His Sense of Integrity Collapsed"

If ever there was a man of integrity, it was Isaiah ben Amoz. He was a whole man, a together type of a fellow.  He was considered by his contemporaries as the most righteous man in the nation. He was respected as a paragon of virtue. Then he caught one sudden glimpse of a holy God. In that single moment, all of his self-esteem was shattered. In a brief second he was exposed, made naked beneath the gaze of the absolute standard of holiness. As long as Isaiah could compare himself to other mortals, he was able to sustain a lofty opinion of his own character. The instant he measured himself by the ultimate standard, he was destroyed—morally and spiritually annihilated. He was undone. He came apart. His sense of integrity collapsed.

- R.C. Sproul, The Holiness of God


(HT:  Challies)

Saved From God? Really?

That we are shocked by the idea that we are saved from God reveals two crucial shortcomings in our understanding. We fail to understand who God is, and we fail to understand who we are. Our view of God is too low, and our view of mankind is too high.

- R.C. Sproul, Saved from What?, p. 27

Do We Need Ultimate Judgment?

I talk to people about Jesus frequently. They say to me things like, “R. C., if you find believing in Jesus meaningful, if that turns you on, if it gives you some kind of solace or what- ever, then that’s fine for you. But I don’t feel the need for Jesus.”

What are they saying? It’s like somebody who says he doesn’t feel the need for a fireman because his house is not on fire. Who needs a fireman when there’s no fire? Who needs a Savior when there’s no clear and present threat of judgment? People today simply do not believe that there will be a day of judgment. But if we believed it, really believed it, the energy of our evangelism would increase a hundredfold.

- R.C. Sproul, Saved from What?, p. 23

I think most people can resonate with the Biblical idea of "the day of judgment".  Who wants Hitler to not have to give an account for his horrific life?  He gets to commit suicide and that's it?  Game over?  In my experience, that rattles the cage of most unbelievers.  We just can't handle the idea of personal judgment and thus have the innate need to suppress the idea that judgment will come upon us individually.  That is the rub.  In our world we know we need judgment in a general sense but certainly not in a personal one.

The Curse Motif

Mark Driscoll's Full Interview With R.C. Sproul

• Has R.C. Sproul Ever Been on the Internet?
• Does God Really Want All People To Be Saved?
• Apostasy in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America?
• What Is the Biggest Upcoming Theological Battle?
• R.C. Sproul and Alice Cooper
• How Do You Prepare Yourself for Ministry?
• R.C. Sproul's Greatest Battle and How He Recovered
• If R.C. Sproul Could Do Anything Over Again, What Would It Be?
• How Has R.C. Sproul's Wife Impacted Him?
• R.C. Sproul's Ministry Legacy
• How Does R.C. Sproul Feel About Facebook?

James MacDonald - Wise Up About Alcohol - Part 6

Here is Pastor MacDonald’s final reason for why he believes that total abstinence should be the norm for all Christians. Listen to his message here and here if you like.

6. Because wisdom calls me to set it aside.

I am honestly glad that Pastor MacDonald is convinced in his own mind that the wisest choice is for him to totally abstain. I have zero problem with that. And because he has this conviction, it is the wisest choice for him to abstain. But what I do have a problem with is his trumpeting of this view for all his people as the wisest choice for all Christians. As pastors we are called to teach our people the explicit word of God and seek to unify our people around the centrality of the Gospel. When a pastor stands before his people and proclaims his views on matters that are amoral it goes against what Paul writes here in Romans 14:

3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

If the Bible does not give a firm stance on an issue then those who lead God's people should not either. It is not as though a pastor shouldn’t speak to issues that are amoral and help his people think through them, but this should always be done in such a way as to not give the impression that those who choose differently than the pastor are somehow weird, odd, or backsliding. I find this statement from Pastor MacDonald to be profoundly unhelpful for his people:

“I can’t imagine for the life of me why a follower of Jesus Christ, a blood purchased son or daughter of the living God, would involve themselves with something that is reeking the havoc in our society that it is. I don’t understand it.”

On issues such as this, pastors should rather use the advice of Paul from Romans 14 and “keep it between themselves and God” (Rom. 14:22). As Augustine said, “in essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.” I fear that Pastor MacDonald is not showing his people the way of liberty, but rather dividing them by condemning something that the Bible does not condemn.

Pastor MacDonald uses Proverbs 20:1 to support his view that total abstinence is the best choice. It reads, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise.” Pastor MacDonald anticipates the potential objection of someone saying, “I am not being ‘led astray’ by alcohol so this verse doesn’t apply to me.” He responds by saying that it is even better to not be on the path to being led astray by alcohol, so total abstinence should be chosen. He would say that since he has chosen total abstinence he is farther removed from any temptation than one who chooses to partake in a responsible fashion. At face value this sounds good, but in reality does not follow.

Think of sex. Alcohol abuse doesn’t even hold a candle to the way in which sex is abused in our culture. Does the fact that I participate in sex with my wife mean that I am somehow going to be led down a path of sexual abomination? This does not follow. Consider eating. How many people do you know that have a problem with eating and are grossly overweight? But does eating in general necessarily lead you down the path of being sinfully gluttonous? Certainly not. His logic simply does not hold. Participation in something within healthy, God-given boundaries does not necessarily mean that one will certainly be led to abuse that same thing.

Pastor MacDonald closes his message by using Romans 14 to support his position. It seems to me that if he took the above verses (3-4) to heart he wouldn’t preach his message the way he did. I won’t take the time here to interact with all the Paul is trying to get at in Romans 14, but I will point you to a short paper that our teaching pastor at Desert Springs Church, Ryan Kelly, wrote for the elders of our church that has to do with this topic. Key questions to consider are dealt with in his paper and I would recommend it to you all.

Pastor MacDonald says towards the end or his message:

“It’s best for you that I abstain. So that when you look to me as an example, you can say, ‘Well he is so concerned about it that he’s decided to have nothing to do with it. Maybe that’s the choice that I should make too.’ And I praise God if people choose to steer completely away from alcohol. There is nothing good for you there. I respect that choice. I think that is wise.”

I wonder if Pastor MacDonald would be willing to say this to Jesus and his disciples? Why didn’t Jesus or his disciples make the choice that Pastor MacDonald does? Were they not wise? Does Pastor MacDonald have little respect for Jesus’ choice to not abstain? Why should he condemn for his people what Jesus has approved? It seems that he is treading on very dangerous ground with this statement.

R.C. Sproul writes the following in his commentary on Romans 14:

Someone I know sits on the board of trustees of a Christian institution, and as a member of that board, he is not allowed to drink wine. The organization has elevated a preference to a rule. They have legislated where God has given freedom. He explained to me that the board was concerned that its members stand out from the culture at large, and I replied, “Do you realize that Jesus and the apostles could not serve on the board of your organization?” We can appreciate their concern to keep the institution unspotted from the world, but their position is one of weakness.

Sproul closes his comments on Romans 14:1-13 with this:

I recall a certain dinner I ate with a group at a restaurant. The waitress came to serve us and asked, “May I take your drink orders? Would anybody like a cocktail?” Our hostess cut her off, saying, “No, we are Christians.” The smug self-righteousness of our hostess not only embarrassed the waitress, who was simply doing her job, but she gave a wrong message about Christianity. Christianity is not about eating and drinking.

Drinking alcohol is a controversial topic in the Christian community. Many argue that Jesus never drank wine and that when the Pharisees called Jesus a winebibber, they were distorting the truth. They also argue that the wine Jesus made for the wedding in Canaan was unfermented. Arguing that way, however, is a hopeless, tortuous treatment of the biblical text, but it happens when people come to the text with a cultural bias. Many are convinced that total abstinence is the only spiritual way, but we learn no such thing from the Scriptures - not from the Old Testament or from the celebration of the Passover. If we were to do a word study of the word wine in the Bible, we would see that it was the real thing. God sanctified it and warned against drinking too much of it, because getting drunk is a sin. God did not give that warning against drunkenness to people drinking grape juice.

This view is offensive to many people. To all such who are convinced that they cannot drink wine, then they must never let wine touch their lips, because for them it is a sin. For others it is not. Our brother ought not to judge us, and we ought not to judge our brother.

So why am I taking so much time to write on this subject? A couple closing remarks:

1. Our churches should not be divided on these types of issues. When it comes to this message, I fear that Pastor MacDonald has contributed to an ethos at his church that is unhelpful and unbiblical. We should be communicating freedom on extra-biblical matters and not give such a strong word on one side or another. Most Christians are spring loaded towards legalism and we should not add fuel to that fire. In the end, these posts are probably less about alcohol and more about healthy ecclesiology.

2. I honestly have not done a lot of thinking along these lines in the past and wanted to systematize my thoughts a bit on this issue. It is sure to come up at the church where I will serve in Madison, WI, thus these posts will probably turn into a position paper of sorts.

If you have been tracking with these posts, thanks for reading. I never thought it would generate the type of response that it has. Again, please consider Paul’s words again in Romans 14:3-4 as you ponder this issue. We are sure to disagree at times, but may love rule the discussion.

If you would like to read all of these post in one place, you can do so here. (Start at the bottom.)

November Book Giveaway

In partnership withe Crossway Books, I'll be giving away three copies of R.C. Sproul's new commentary, Romans: The Righteous Shall Live By Faith.

If you want to be entered in the random drawing, sign up for the RSS feed (or twitter if you already have subscribed to my RSS) and email me to let me know. If you already have both (or don't use twitter) just email me anyway and let me know you want in.

Here is a description of this commentary:

Sproul's sermons at St. Andrew's Chapel are the foundation of these never-before-published expositions on Paul's epistle to the Romans.

Chrysostom had it read aloud to him once a week. Augustine, Luther, and Wesley all came to assured faith through its impact. The Reformers saw it as the God-given key to understanding the whole of Scripture.

Throughout church history the study of the book of Romans has been pivotal to understanding Christian life and doctrine. Convinced that "Paul's fullest, grandest, most comprehensive statement of the gospel" is just as vital today, R. C. Sproul delivered nearly sixty sermons on Romans from October 2005 to April 2007 at St. Andrew's Chapel, where he has pastored for more than a decade. These never-before-published expositions are now being released in a hardcover book comprising nearly 600 pages of material. Sproul's passage-by-passage expositions will not only enrich any preaching or teaching ministry but any thoughtful study of this weighty epistle.

Sproul on Corporate Prayer

Dr. R.C. Sproul has a short article on corporate prayer that is worth considering. His conclusion:

Prayer is not just a tangential or peripheral part of corporate worship. In ancient Israel, the primary function of worship was the offering of praise, the offering of prayer. And so it should be in our churches today. Our sanctuaries should be houses of prayer.