One of the things I’ve always appreciated with him was how he would at certain times follow the implications of Scriptural texts to their clear implications,  even if it made himself or others uncomfortable!  He was pretty gutsy like that at times.  It is very evident that He was not first of all trying to make a consistent, coherent system. Sometimes it lead to surprising conclusions that would shock those who came after him and esteem him. And despite certain errors in his theology, I think we can all admire the way he would throw caution to the wind and take what God says in his Book seriously.

His sermons on a number of books of the Bible are published, including a book of sermons on Ephesians. Here are a few excerpts from various writings, both things he has specifically written and also written excerpts from his sermons:

“We must make our election sure in Christ. We dare not become participant in evil things and fall as Israel; which is a good lesson to us. Adam fell and Israel also fell. We, however, cannot fall when we stand and are blessed and called through the Gospel, for in love toward us He has predestinated us unto sonship—we shall be His children. We shall believe and let Him reign in us. Then it is manifest that we were, in times past, called and chosen to become His sons. The Father beforehand appointed this in His Son that we should be children of God; reborn of the spirit. So let us bestow care upon our being acceptable to Him, for our calling follows our being chosen.”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.206 ;  from his comments on Ephesians 1:4-6 ; published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

“Paul says here that the Father, through the Son, hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings and made us citizens of heaven, which is based on the eternal decision of God, which was made through Christ before the foundation of the world was laid.

The election is deeply grounded with God. When a person is called to the true church of Christ, so that he is converted from darkness to light, it is a predestination which was made before the foundation of the world. This is certain—that if a person who is  called, was predestinated by Christ before the foundation of the world, he will accept the call. The predestination is an election, through which it becomes manifest whom God bath chosen, and the elect come forth so that they may be blessed with all spiritual blessings The election is deeply grounded with God. When a person is called to the true church of Christ, so that he is converted from darkness to light, it is a predestination which was made before the foundation of the world. This is certain—that if a person who is called, was predestinated by Christ before the foundation of the world, he will accept the call. The predestination is an election, through which it becomes manifest whom God bath chosen, and the elect come forth so that they may be blessed with all spiritual blessings earthly. Yet, therefore, we have the spirit in us—the image of the heavenly.

There is much indeed in us. Whoever is from above will also come again thereto; whoever is not from above, will come into the pool of the devil: for a kingdom is already prepared for us. Our destination has been fixed for us by God before the foundation of the world. We must needs rejoice in that our futurity has been established by God— before the foundation of the world! Let us rejoice in that our succession is an election, so that we stand firmly therein and do not serve another spirit, for it is now an inward, hidden kingdom of grace in us—that it may become manifest at His appearance, when the people will be separated from one another and it shall be said, ‘ . . . Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.’ Matthew 25:34.

‘Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:’

He hath chosen us to be holy and without blame in the world—and the chosen in the world are easily recognized because of their holiness and blamelessness. In God, everything that occurs was fore-known. He knows what takes place. He knew beforehand of Adam’s fall. For that reason the harm that we sustained through Adam was healed again in His Son.  Before our redemption takes place, there is this definite resolution of God. We have tasted, seen and experienced what sin in the world is. Therefore if we are chosen, we cannot turn back and take it on again. Adam took from us what we had and Christ restored it again and gave us an earnest in heaven, namely, the Spirit. We cannot then throw it away.”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.203-204 ;  from his comments on Ephesians 2; published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

“And our predestination is also simultaneously old for He had, in time past, appointed us unto adoption to Himself. The disclosure of adoption is already made known here when God enlightens us, so that the light in us shall shine forth out of the darkness. If we were thus called, so that we are now with Christ, when this calling has come to light, we then know that is as old as the calling of the Son was from the Father, that is, from everlasting. For nothing has happened and nothing can happen which He did not know and assign from eternity. So whoever was (or is) called may know thereby that he was predestinated before the foundation of the world was lain.”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.207 ;  from his comments on Ephesians 1:4-6 ; published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

“The children of God, therefore, are well known in the world by their love towards one
another, as well as by the hatred and enmity with which they are persecuted by men
because they are no longer of the world but of God, and indeed are so separated and set
apart from the world that they constitute an unmistakable contrast to it (enter into
opposition with it), yet not according to their own choice or bidding but by God’s
election and calling of grace”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.923 ;  from his comments on I John 3:11 ; published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

“But because the world cannot receive the Spirit of truth, for it neither knows nor sees Him, it is evident that all who do receive Him and become children of God must be singled out and set apart from the world, on God’s part by election as well as on the world’s part by expulsion and rejection.”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.923 ;  from his comments on I John 3:11 ; published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

“For the zealous champions of the doctrine which teaches the restoration of all things cast me aside as an upholder of the doctrine of predestination, and the latter believe that they can detect an inconsistency in my teaching concerning the election of grace. And yet, I do not hold to two conflicting doctrines, for I believe in the election of God according to the Scriptures; but instead of maintaining my view in the character of a point of doctrine, I rather preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ in a simple manner wherever I chance to be, and leave the separation to God.”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.432; “A Short Statement Wherein I Make Clear My Religious Convictions to the New English Continental Society In Answer to Six Questions Propounded by Them”;  published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

“I well know that the elect of God are preserved unto blessedness by the power of God; but who the elect are, in their persons, that we do not know. God alone knows and He knows them that are His, and I think that they who thus boast and insist are least of all the elect, because the former are humble and work out their salvation with fear and trembling.”

(Samuel H. Froehlich in Writings of Samuel Froehlich;  pp.493; “Hauptwyl April — 1836 From a letter to a brother in Ebenat”;  published by The Heritage Center Foundation)

No doubt, many of the things Froehlich said in these passages are horribly inconsistent with other things he’s said and he certainly does not follow the implications of these insights consistently. To be honest, his theology is severely muddled at certain points. But all these quotes are reflective of the fact that there are certain things in Ephesians and other Bible texts that you just can’t avoid (if you are committed to following the Bible wherever it goes, that is).   And Froehlich is honest enough to not avoid them.

Certainly Froehlich, for all his theological problems, to some extent saw the glorious divine grace which is electing grace towards those who, to quote the Westminster Confession of Faith,  “God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed time, effectually to call, by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh….renewing their wills, and, by His almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace”.

It is evident that while Froehlich taught  some elements of the Reformed teaching on predestination, he was very inconsistent in how he worked that out, and I believe, was not so Biblical in the way he handled various implications/related issues pertaining to divine grace. He very much obscured what he said on election by many other things he taught. Froehlich is no longer around. But it would be a wonderful day when all those who came after Froehlich would concede the predestination evident in the glorious divine, electing grace of God, as reflected so clearly in Ephesians and elsewhere in the Bible.  And then perhaps at that time they could also be willing to go past Froehlich in not only following the Biblical texts into predestination but to continue and also follow the Biblical implications of this predestination (many of which Froehlich clearly did not grasp–or at least did not like).

I tried to select a wide range of reformed/evangelical-oriented books.  The 12 representative books are:

• Apologetics to the Glory of God: An Introduction by John Frame
• Acts of the Apostles (Geneva Series of Commentaries) by J. Alexander
• Easy Chairs, Hard Words: Conversations on the Liberty of God by Douglas Wilson
• Valley of Vision: A collection of Puritan Prayers & Devotions
• The Christ of the Covenants by O. Palmer Robertson
• 12 Challenges Churches Face by Mark Dever
• The Humanness of John Calvin by Richard Stauffer
• The Justification of God by John Piper
• Dining with the Devil: The Megachurch Movement Flirts with Modernity by O.S. Guinness
• A Christian Manifesto by Francis Schaeffer
• A Lifting Up For The Downcast by William Bridge
• When Sinners Say I Do by Dave Harvey

And the sellers I’m comparing are: Amazon, Monergism Books, Solid Ground Books, Christian Books, Westminister Theological Seminary Bookstore, and Cumberland Valley Bible Book Service.

Keep in mind I’m not comparing customer service or shipping, this comparison focuses exclusively on price and availability.  Obviously whether one can get free shipping, timely shipping, and attentive customer service will impact your experience just as much, if not more, than price and availability will. In my experiences, Amazon and Monergism Books are generally very good with shipping and customer service, but I can’t vouch for the others.

In terms of availability, Amazon and Christian Books were the best.  They had all the books. Monergism Books, Westminister Theological Seminary Bookstore, and Cumberland Valley Bible Book Service were not bad with 9/12 books.  Solid Ground Books was the worst with only 3/12 of the books.

We must of course make allowance for Solid Ground Books, since they tend to focus in their selection more than the other sites (another story for another time: I was not thrilled with their service the last time I tried to order).

In terms of pricing, Monergism Books was the best–featuring the lowest price on 6 of the books! Westminister Theological Seminary Bookstore, Cumberland Valley Bible Book Service, and Christian Books were pretty good with 2-3 books being the lowest price.  Amazon (surprisingly) and Solid Ground Books were the worst, never carrying the lowest price on any books.

So overall, I must give kudos to Monergism Books for showing the best in this comparison. They offered the best prices and, while not dominating our evaluation of availability, they did pretty well in that category too.

“God created a world of beauty in space and time; but he also made us to know him and to live in his presence; he thus sets eternity and a desire for it in our hearts. Consequently, we can never be finally satisfied with anything the world can offer us. Made as God’s image, created for him, we must remain forever dissatisified until we live in fellowship with him and for his glory.”

– Sinclair Ferguson in The Pundit’s Folly

“What we now need to do is to inquire in what way the principle of redemptively mediate revelation of the standard of ethics appeared in the time of the Old Testament.  In answer to this question we naturally tend to think at once of the Decalogue.  We often speak of God’s revealing himself in the Old Testament through the law and in the New Testament through the gospel.  There is much truth in this contrast, but as it stands it is misleading.  In the first place, it is misleading because God did not make his standard known to man by law only in the Old Testament.  In the second place, the law in the Old Testament cannot be contrasted to grace in any absolute way, because it is itself a part of the covenant of grace.  We should be clear on both points if we wish to see the relations of things correctly.”

– Cornelius Van Til in  “Christian Theistic Ethics,” Vol 3 of “In Defense of the Faith,” den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1974,  pp. 143, 144

And the atheist–a complex chemical reaction according to the best contemporary science–uncorks with scathing observations on the hypocracies of other complex chemical reactions. Hitchens does this in the first five lines of his book, and shows no sign of letting up. But how can a chemical reaction be hypocritical? … Given his premises,  it is like being indignant with a tornado, or vegetable soup, or sand on the beach–but Hitchens does it. They all do…When atheists stop suspending their moral  indignation from their invisible sky hook, then I will no longer amuse myself by pointing out their levitation trick.

– Douglas Wilson in God Is: How Christianity Explains Everything

“It is most absurd, therefore, to maintain, as some do, that religion was devised by the cunning and craft of a few individuals, as a means of keeping the body of the people in due subjection, while there was nothing which those very individuals, while teaching others to worship God, less believed than the existence of a God. I readily acknowledge, that designing men have introduced a vast number of fictions into religion, with the view of inspiring the populace with reverence or striking them with terror, and thereby rendering them more obsequious; but they never could have succeeded in this, had the minds of men not been previously imbued with that uniform belief in God, from which, as from its seed, the religious propensity springs. And it is altogether incredible that those who, in the matter of religion, cunningly imposed on their ruder neighbours, were altogether devoid of a knowledge of God. For though in old times there were some, and in the present day not a few are found who deny the being of a God, yet, whether they will or not, they occasionally feel the truth which they are desirous not to know. We do not read of any man who broke out into more unbridled and audacious contempt of the Deity than C. Caligula, and yet none showed greater dread when any indication of divine wrath was manifested. Thus, however unwilling, he shook with terror before the God whom he professedly studied to condemn.”

John Calvin — The Institutes of Christian Religion Book i. Chapter iii. Part ii.

–

The Humanness of John Calvin: The Reformer as a Husband, Father, Pastor & Friend by Richard Stauffer, Solid Ground Christian Books

If you are at all interested in the Swiss Reformer John Calvin, I must heartily commend to you this book. In a mere 100 or so pages, Stauffer does an excellent job of a painting a portrait of Calvin. It’s probably a different portrait than what you may have in your mind, but its very accurate and corrects a lot of misconceptions of Calvin.

Calvin is slandered by his enemies, but even people who like him tend to pigeon-hole him into something he is not. Calvin was not a one-track theologian with nothing on his mind but predestination. He was not a cold, heartless exegete. He had a soft pastoral heart and a friendly, temperate disposition in many ways. One by one, Stauffer shows Calvin as a Husband, Father, Pastor, and Friend. To me, the most enlightening of these was “Friend”. The book really shows through primary sources how Calvin came along side people, cared for them, and was fiercely loyal to them. And it was not just one or two friendships that he nurtured, instead Calvin sought a handful of friendships and really himself poured into them.

The section on Calvin as “Pastor” is also very good, showing the way he cared for his people and also his humble approach, even upholding the church leadership which overthrew his own, because he felt it was still a valid church. Calvin’s pastoral heart really shines forth and refutes the idea which relegates Calvin to some sort of cold-hearted dictator. The portrayals of his sympathy and care for human suffering really dispels a lot of common misconceptions.

We also get a good glimpse into Calvin’s married life, and how he cared for his children. Their time was not an easy one, and Calvin’s faith and humanness really comes out as they go through various difficulties, including the plague.

There are two other areas that come out in this book, which aren’t part of the subtitle but seemed prominent to me. First of all, there is a great portrayal of Calvin as a Bachelor and second Calvin as a Matchmaker. Calvin’s desire to encourage good matches for his friends really comes out here.

If your ethical criteria is “which way the wind blows”, then you are out of luck, respected people are landing on both sides of this.  I think you are on pretty flimsy ground if you are willing ot sign something merely on the basis that someone else you respect has signed it.

Signatories include Albert Mohler, J.I. Packer, Brian Chapell, William Edgar, Martin Olavsky, etc.

John MacArthur, James White, Alistair Begg, Frank Turk, Tim Challies, etc. have gone on record stating why they have refused to sign.

Here are a few scattered comments that come to my mind (they are generic, not specifically tailored for this particular declaration):

1. As a general rule, as of late, I try to be as skeptical I can. I think an appropriate posture is to start assuming no positive obligation to sign and then wait to see if one is presented. We should then refuse to feel pressured to sign. And then if we discover a negative obligation we shouldn’t even give consideration to signing. Emotionalism likes to rally people to causes and often it overstates the necessity.  The world is full of causes trying to make you believe you have some positive obligation to join.  This sort of “group think” can potentially be very scary.

2. Agreeing with a declaration 100% does not imply a positive obligation to sign it. Signing goes beyond mere agreement. Also, it is possible that we could fully agree with the “what” (the declarations bare statements  but could refuse to sign it for reasons pertaining to “why”, “who”, or “when”. We should not be pressured into thinking that  support for the “what” necessitates our supporting the “why”, “who”, or “when”.

3. When signing something, beyond the bare question of whether we agree with its terms, we should also consider what it will accomplish. Though it might be easy, we should never see signing something as a trivial matter (whether it be a declaration, a cheque, or a contract). Signing is a serious thing and we should always consider it that, even if it technically takes very little time.

4. This reminds me of how activism is often so much more complicated than we conservative Christians like to make it out to be. The what vs. why, who, how distinction outlines this.

5. The company we keep matters. A reputable name signing a declaration NEVER creates a positive obligation to sign, but a disreputable name signing a declaration COULD create a negative obligation in some circumstances. While signing a declaration is mainly a matter of agreeing with its propositions, I would argue that is not the only consideration.

I will not be signing this declaration for a few reasons that I do not feel compelled to explain in detail  here.  Suffice it to say, I see no positive obligation and I see cases being made for a negative obligation. In light of that, signing, to me, would at best be a matter of indifference (if there is no negative obligation) and at worst it would be wrong-headed to sign it (in the case that there is a negative obligation).

I believe in the sanctity of human life, the dignity of Christian marriage, and the rights of conscience and religion liberty. I do not feel compelled to sign the Manhattan Declaration in order to affirm that. The creators of the declaration have no particular reason to be concerned about my non-signing. Nobody is going to follow in my footsteps for the sake of following in my foot steps. At least I hope not.

“3 years ago Matt Fenn became one of the 30,000 people per year to be disfellowshipped from the Jehovah’s Witnesses. He shares with us his journey and sheds light on the teachings of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society along the way.”