thoughts and ruminations while in exile (1 Pet. 2:11)

Wow! I can't believe the conference is over already. I can honestly say this conference was exactly what I needed. Before attending I prayed and asked the Lord that this conference might motivate me and rejuvenate me in ways that I could not imagine--He answered that prayer.

I entitled this blog "Drawing Lines In The Sand" because I believe that's what this conference did--it drew lines in the sand--separating the true Christians from those who are only Christians in name. If you are confused by such a statement, I suggest you keep reading. To me, this conference could have been entitled after a book Dr. Sproul has written, "Getting The Gospel Right." While the gospel seems so basic to Christianity (and it should be), unfortunately in our day, many want to redefine it, insert language that is ambiguous (this is done in the name of unity), or completely redefine it. The most recent group to try and redefine the gospel would be the "Emerging Church."

Speaking personally, I enjoyed both of John MacArthur's messages, "Who is Jesus?" and "Simultaneously Righteous and A Sinner." While his first message "Who is Jesus?" seems basic to Christianity, he approached it from a different perspective. The gist of the message was that the world cannot just get certain aspects correct concerning the nature and character of Jesus, they must get His identity right, namely, that He is the incarnate Son of God. His second message was very well done. The most important truth I think he communicated in this message was that there is no shortcut to sanctification. There is no such thing as "Crisis sanctification," so called by certain traditions which say that after going through such an experience, one can become completely sanctified, that is, sinless. This is obviously stressed in certain denominations. MacArthur noted that this type of theology stems mostly from Methodism, and more specifically is an aberrant teaching that came from Charles Finney, whose teachings have been labeled heretical (I can say I concur with such an assessment).

While I will not go into too much detail, I will just mention here that both of Dr. Sinclair Ferguson's messages were great. He lectured on "The Substitutionary Atonement," and "The Nature of Saving Faith." As I said, both were great, but if you had to buy either message I would definitely say to get "The Nature of Saving Faith."

I SAVE THE BEST FOR LAST: Hopefully you've read this whole blog, because this is why I have entitled this "Drawing Lines In The Sand." The two most important messages of this entire conference were taught by Dr. Sproul. His lectures were entitled "Sola Fide," and "Imputed Righteousness." I personally believe these messages will go down in history as being two of the most important lectures in our era. This may seem like a massive overstatement, and I may be shown to be wrong in the future. So why do I say such a thing? I say this, again, because of the times in which we live. In a day where the truths of the gospel seem to be "up for grabs," and where there is a careless attitude toward doctrine--especially concerning the content of the gospel. This mostly shines forth amongst Christians who believe that though there are sharp disagreements on exactly what the gospel is, everyone is still saved. That is to say, different Christian traditions say we are saved different ways: some say by faith, some say by faith alone, others say by faith plus baptism, some say "faith" encompasses baptism, etc. The tacit assumption is that all groups basically believe the same thing. My response to that: NOT TRUE! We must, and I repeat, must get the gospel right. All groups cannot be right. A basic course on logic tells us that much.

In his two messages, Dr. Sproul "drew a line in the sand." He presented the truths of sola fide and imputed righteousness and said in no uncertain terms, "This is the essence of the gospel." To believe this is to be Christian, and to repudiate this is to be apostate. There is no middle ground. To reject sola fide is to cease to be a church. Some may not like this and say it is too divisive. To such a statement our rejoinder comes in the form of a question: "Am I seeking the favor of men, or of God? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a slave of Christ?" (Gal. 1:10).

I entitled this blog "Drawing Lines In The Sand." I think it is obvious why I chose that title. Some may not like what I have said. You may think it is too divisive and/or that it raises lots of questions about certain groups within Christendom. Thus, why I said it's about "drawing a line in the sand." The Reformation was about telling people who thought they were Christians, "You are not Christian." May Christians stand up and raise the banner of the biblical gospel and preach it with tenacity and love for the glory of God alone.

Soli Deo Gloria