Navigating Assurance

Welcome to No Compromise Radio, a ministry coming to you from Bethlehem Bible Church in West Boylston.

No Compromise Radio is a program dedicated to the ongoing proclamation of Jesus Christ, based on the theme in Galatians 2, verse 5, where the

Apostle Paul said, But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel would remain with you.

In short, if you like smooth, watered -down words to make you simply feel good, this show isn't for you.

By purpose, we are first biblical, but we can also be controversial. Stay tuned for the next 25 minutes as we're called by the divine trumpet to summon the troops for the honor and glory of her

King. Here's our host, Pastor Mike Abendroth. Welcome to No Compromise Radio ministry. My name is

Mike Abendroth. This is show number five for this week. New show number five.

Take that, Fred. I don't think Fred listens anymore, but if you do, Fred, welcome. Good to hear you. Good to see you.

I'm off social media now, so I don't know what kind of snarky stuff you've been doing or saying, but I'm sure it's motivated by pure motives.

What do we have? We have books. If you want to order any books, you can.

We have Israel in 2022. You can email me for that. If there's a pastor that you have that's faithful,

Christ -centered, and you'd like to have him on No Compromise Radio, I'd love, and I do love, to interview pastors in behind -the -scenes places that aren't looking for fame or fortune.

They just want to be faithful, and the Lord has many of those planted around the world.

Does he not? Only eternity will really tell the tale with that. While there are many places that don't have many good

Bible teachers, thankfully, there are Bible teachers around the world, and they preach, they administer the sacraments, and the

Lord, through simple means, ordinary means, builds his church. You know, it's fascinating to me as you look at the opulence of the

Old Testament temple worship, and you just think of all the senses, and sight, and sound, and everything else smell with incense.

Oops, sorry about that. Just banged my headphones while I was trying to crack my neck. I'll probably get an email from somebody who listens, don't crack your neck.

I have to. My back hurts. And then you move to the New Testament, and on the other side of the resurrected

Lord Jesus, you have bread, and wine, and water, right?

Some onion skin paper, or parchment, or vellum. Very very simple, and that's why when it's pyrotechnics, and I don't know why it is, but a lot of these secret sensitive churches now, it's the blue background lights.

I don't know, does blue enhance worship? When I'm in the jacuzzi, and I don't really feel it's very warm.

If you put the red light on, it seems warmer. If you are too hot, you put the blue light on, it makes it seem cooler.

Now before I get into my message today in 2 Peter, I saw this Jesus Creed, a blog by Scott McKnight.

And I think McKnight now is hosting Amy Bird. When Amy Bird was,

I don't know what actually happened, was she removed from mortification of spin, and the alliance of confessing evangelicals, ref 21, did she go on her own power?

I mean, it's not for me to know I guess, but let's just say if it's true that she left by force, somebody forced her out.

I find it fascinating that she landed, did she not land at Scott McKnight's blog? Is that where she's blogging now? I haven't looked since she's left mortification of spin.

And I never listened to mortification of spin except few exceptions.

I like Todd, I like Carl, I just thought Amy came, she just had a different slant.

And so therefore, I mean, it had nothing to do personally, I've never met her and she's probably a fine lady, it's just what she said

I didn't care for. So I don't have to listen to a podcast if I don't want to. I would be more apt to listen now with just the two of those guys.

But all that to say, Scott McKnight, Jesus Creed, February 18th, 2021, that's recent, christianatoday .com.

I don't subscribe to the magazine anymore because of articles like this, but I did find this, somebody sent it to me.

And in the old days, I could just be on Twitter and I would know what was going on in evangelicalism and now people have to send me stuff.

Like Andrew, this sends me a lot of stuff, or at least used to. I need stuff now, Andrew. A plea and warning for evangelicalism.

What do you think he's going to say? Here's a few things that he said.

He's talking about things like young earth creationism, kind of what's going on in evangelicalism, women in ministry, equating neo -reformed

Calvinism with orthodoxy, equating all social justice concerns with pandering to liberals and or an uncritical and naive acceptance of Marxism.

He thinks these are kind of, you know, these conservative Christian commitments and do we really need those?

McKnight, the sad thing is most biblical scholars and theologians I know, many of whom are conservative or moderate and deeply love the church and care about its future, agree.

The brand of evangelicalism that exists in many conservative evangelical churches has about 30 years left of life.

Its national influence has been waning for decades. Well, that's interesting.

It buys more life by sacrificing the next generation on the altar of past generations fundamentalism.

A couple of points in this regard. Training is important.

You should not sit under a pastor who has no serious biblical or theological training. Okay, well,

I'm not really against that. You know, you can have exceptions that prove the rule, but even somebody like Spurgeon or Lloyd -Jones, they were trained, maybe self -trained and maybe a pastor in their local church trained them, but some kind of, well, we don't need to know anything.

That's not going to be helpful. The second one I found fascinating, MacArthur, Sproul, Piper, et cetera, are not reliable Bible scholars or theologians.

There's a reason why they're almost universally regarded in academia as unreliable biblical or theological guides.

It's not because academia is liberal. It's because most of the experts recognize that folks like this, however much good they have done for the kingdom of God, don't demonstrate the necessary competencies to handle complex historical, biblical, and theological issues with skill and nuance.

There's a reason why many have flocked to Wright, McKnight, Byrd, et cetera. He's writing this about himself.

It's not just because they found in these scholars, he's calling himself a scholar. A tasteful balance and nuance, he's calling himself balance and nuance.

It's because they recognize a requisite competency that I, Scott McKnight, have. I guess

I agree with the Piper thing, because Piper doesn't get law gospel right because of his Daniel Fuller influence in his book,

Future Grace, and the hedonism thing. I don't want to read

Piper. I don't get helped when I read Piper. He destroys assurance.

Some of you have listened and you've thought to yourself, you know what, he introduced me to the Doctrines of Grace and this, that, and the other, fine, and in that I rejoice, but No Compromise Radio doesn't endorse

John Piper at all, and therefore you ought to pick somebody else to listen to.

I don't think he's a reliable theologian. I actually agree with McKnight on that.

MacArthur, he's got here too, MacArthur, Sproul, and Piper. Okay, since my background is

Master's Seminary, yet I've distanced myself theologically from dispensationalism,

I won't say anything about MacArthur, but I will say something about Sproul. So let's just work through this.

Remember, he doesn't like young earth people, women in ministry issues, he's not, you know,

I'm sure he's an egalitarian, neo -reformed Calvinism is the way to go, and we don't want any social justice, critical race theory stuff.

That's the bad side, and if you listen to Piper, Sproul, and MacArthur, they're going to influence you in those ways.

I think that's what he's getting at. Well, he, of course, is a scholar, and people flock to him.

So let's think about this Sproul thing. Let me just read it in the singular, Sproul is not a reliable biblical scholar or theologian.

There's a reason why Sproul is universally regarded in academia as an unreliable biblical or theological guide.

R .C. Sproul does not demonstrate the necessary competencies to handle complex historical, biblical, and theological issues with skill and nuance.

Dude. And this is, for me,

McKnight said, a plea and a warning. There are some merits to mere Christianity, evangelicalism, but it must beware of falling prey to some of the worst of the unintended consequences of Luther's Reformation.

I mean, this is just garbage in my mind. In my opinion, it's just garbage. R .C.

Sproul, historically, biblically, theologically, or Scott McKnight, if you had to pick the two.

N .T. Wright or R .C. Sproul. He says, more

Van Hooser, Moo, and Schreiner, and less MacArthur, Sproul, and Piper. Well, Schreiner and Piper, to me, are one and the same in terms of their background and Bethel Seminary and everything else.

Moo, his commentaries are fine.

I want him to be understanding Romans 8 a little different, but here he says, but better yet, more

Wright, more McKnight, and now Berringer, more Richter, more Macaulay, more Bates, more Edwards, Dennis, not

Jonathan, more Warren, Tish, not Rick, and more Bird, just to name a few.

Now, did he write this? Oh, you know what? I stand corrected.

It was posted underneath this blog, but it says

Scott McKnight blog, but this is posted by Chris Kugler, so at least it's not

McKnight talking about McKnight. So for that, I am wrong and I misspoke because it says here at the top of the paper,

Scott McBlog, Scott McKnight blog, and then here in small letters,

Chris Kugler. So he wrote it. I guess he put it on his blog. So I guess if somebody says, you know, people should listen to No Compromise Radio more often, and then

I post that, I guess it's something like that. But anyway, it's crazy. I would not subscribe to that at all.

If you want R .C. Sproul to be more technical in terms of commentaries and stuff like that, I think we have to go back to what

Ligonier started as and to whom R .C. was intending his messages to go.

Who did he want to hear them? And he would take complex ideas and make them very simple.

And therefore, historically, theologically, biblically, when people want to trash

R .C. Sproul, and I don't even really think R .C., I don't know what he believed about six -day creation.

I assume he believed it. I know he was against critical race theory because Vesta, his wife, mentioned that after R .C.'s

passing in the middle of all the social justice chaos and Black Lives Matter and everything else. Even back in the old days,

D .A. Carson, in his little commentary review, that is his review, that little booklet that would grade commentaries, he did not speak highly of MacArthur because they were more expositional messages and not exegetical

Greek stuff. So I get all that. But for right now, Piper, no,

I would agree. But R .C. Sproul, you've got to be kidding me. Well, my name is Mike Gabendroth.

This is No Compromise Radio. We're talking a little bit about undergirding in the

Christian faith, 2 Peter 1 -4. Now if you remember from the last show, which was a half hour ago for me,

Peter wants his believers—no, they're not his believers—he wants his flock, as it were, that he's an undershepherd of, and for, and to.

Not to be believing the false teachers and the false prophets, but to be undergirded with strength, knowing that God cares for them and God will see to it that they'll make it to the end, and whatever they need now, he will provide.

And that's what 2 Peter 1 -4 is all about. We talked a little bit about a faith that was obtained or received as a sovereign gift, and it's by the righteousness of the

Lord Jesus. So here's my question for the rest of the show for the next 10 minutes. Can you go to heaven if you have your sins forgiven only?

Can you go to heaven if you are only forgiven of your sins? So we've all sinned in many ways, and what if those were all forgiven?

Could we then go to heaven? Now, you don't want to answer too fast now, because you might get a trick question.

What about obeying God? Is it enough to have your disobedience punished on another?

But does not God require obedience? We are creatures, and God requires obedience.

It's fair to say obedience is important to God. God the Creator expects His creation,

His created ones, to obey. God made you, listener, and requires your obedience.

You are to keep God's laws. You are to live up to God's standards. And obedience isn't an option.

And by the way, I'm not talking about just external obedience, but from the heart. Do you delight to do

God's will? Right, so your obedience doesn't matter.

Can you imagine in the Lord Jesus' life? I think of Hebrews 10, verse 5,

Consequently, when Christ came into the world, He said, Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body you have prepared for Me.

In burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. Then I said,

He's going to quote Psalm 40 here, Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of Me in the scroll of the book.

That's a quote from Psalm 40, verse 8. I delight to do your will.

The Net Bible translates Psalm 40 as, I want to do what pleases you, my

God. Your law dominates my thoughts. We need both the penalty of our sins paid for and the positive precepts to be lived out.

We don't need to just be forgiven. We need to obey. And that's why we have something called the active obedience of the

Lord Jesus Christ, where He obeys the law and earns righteousness to give to us by divine reckoning, imputation, a forensic.

I want to say, I said, reckoning, imputed, crediting, or counting.

Those are the two words I was looking for. Remember, Jesus said, which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell you the truth, why do you not believe me?

He's perfectly obeyed, and it's a desire from the heart. It's a delight. How are we going to do that?

If God expects our sins to be punished, and they were, but He also expects obedience, but an obedience from the heart, a desire to please and to glorify.

This is what the Lord Jesus has done. We use the words in theology, preceptive and penalty.

When there's a law, you need to keep it. That's the preceptive part. And if you break it, that's the penalty part.

Jesus had a perfect life of obedience to satisfy all the law's precepts, preceptive.

And then He has earned, because of that, this perfect righteousness that He can bestow to us by imputation.

And then He pays the penalty for our law breaking.

Theologian Shedd said, Holiness is under only a single one.

A guilty man owes both penalty and obedience. Consequently, the justification of a sinner must not only deliver him from the penalty due to disobedience, but provide for him an equivalent to personal obedience.

And that's why Jesus didn't just come to die, but He came to obey, to do this and live.

He was a substitute, yes, and a representative. To do.

I have come to do your will. I delight in your will. And then by that will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Hebrews 10, 9 and 10. The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works wherein life was promised to Adam and in him to his posterity upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.

That's the Westminster Confession of Faith. Your faith, to get back to 2

Peter, is based on the work of Jesus. So therefore, it'll stand.

It's not on your righteousness. It's not my righteousness. It's the Lord Jesus' righteousness. There's a positive demand to the law and a penalty sanction for the law.

And that demands not only, John Murray said, it demands not only the full discharge of its precepts, but also the infliction of penalty for all infractions and shortcomings.

It's twofold demand of the law. Jesus perfectly,

Murray said, met both the penal and preceptive requirements of God's law.

The passive obedience requires, or excuse me, refers to the former and the active obedience to the latter.

Jesus conforms perfectly to the preceptive will of God and he obeys that moral law of God.

What law was that? Adamic law? Yes. Mosaic law?

Yes. Jesus said, my food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his work.

That's what he did. Here I am. It is written about me in the scroll. I have come to do your will,

O God. That's fascinating. Jesus is not only sinless, but he's righteous.

Right? Therefore, when we think about our faith that we received, it's by the righteousness of Jesus.

It's something that Jesus has earned for us. He is the willing sacrifice.

Animals were forced sacrifices, but here Jesus was a willing sacrifice.

More than that, he obeyed as well as paid the penalty for broken sin.

Your faith is in Jesus Christ, who is God. Therefore, it's a perfect righteousness. Do you notice what the text says?

Our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. Divine righteousness can withstand divine holiness on judgment day.

That's correct, isn't it? Jesus is God. People are like, well, is Jesus divine? Well, there it is right there.

And you can look at the original Greek, which will confirm it. Our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

1 Peter didn't say Jesus was a Savior, although he believed it. He didn't use the exact word.

But here, chapter 1, verse 1, verse 11, chapter 2, verse 20, chapter 3, verse 2 and 18.

Savior, Savior, Savior, Savior, Savior. He is the Lord and Savior because he earns righteousness, the preceptive part of the law.

And he pays for our sin that's broken on the penalty sanctions of the law.

And with one definite article connecting the two nouns, in the same case,

Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

You think about what Savior, what do you mean Savior? When you talk about Savior in the Old Testament, you're thinking about who

God is. Jesus is God. He's the Savior. Can you imagine?

Our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. This is the deity of Jesus. When you say

Jesus, you're thinking humanity. When you think of Christ, you're thinking deity. This is the

God -man. So he can be our representative and our substitute. So we can have a perfect righteousness, so we can stand and withstand the wrath of God.

As Jesus has intercepted the Lord, he has exhausted the wrath of God. Because the

Father loved us enough to send the Son to do that very, very thing. Jesus is indeed, as John 4 says, the

Savior of the world. Jesus Christ, our Savior. And therefore, this faith withstands all the false teachers and everything else that goes along with it.

God gives. Well, that's the first truth there that's found. And we'll look at the other truths another time on No Compromise Radio.

If you ever want to write me and say, would you talk about this topic? You can, mike at nocompromiseradio .com.

If you want to send me some links, if you want to send me some, you know, your millionaire's friends' addresses, whatever you want to do, it's fine by me.

It's that time of year again where levels are low for giving and everybody better step up. I don't like to do that and I don't want to do that.

And therefore, we just plow along. And I think we have 12 Patreon supporters. Thank you very much.

We appreciate that. My name is Mike Abendroth. This is nocompromiseradio .com. Thanks for listening.

No Compromise Radio with Pastor Mike Abendroth is a production of Bethlehem Bible Church in West Boylston.

Bethlehem Bible Church is a Bible teaching church firmly committed to unleashing the life transforming power of God's Word through verse by verse exposition of the sacred text.

Please come and join us. Our service times are Sunday morning at 1015 and in the evening at 6. We're right on route 110 in West Boylston.

You can check us out online at bbchurch .org or by phone at 508 -835 -3400.