Dennis Tuuri

# Sermon Transcript – Reformation Covenant Church
## Pastor Dennis Tuuri

Hymn of the month. So, if you want to take the orders of worship home, practice in your families. And I remember now that part of the difficulty of that song is as a bass knowing when to come in on that chorus. So, we’re going to have to kind of work on that and have some visual evidence and all that sort of stuff. We’ll work on it. We’ll sing it for the next month. Joseph Forester has provided a handout on this song of the month, speaking both of the text from the Song of Songs as well as about Isaac Watts and the song itself.

So, avail yourself of that handout today, please. And that should enhance your appreciation for and knowledge of the song. Let me just say that I’m very grateful for Joseph’s work here at Reformation Covenant Church in general. Because of him, we are able to have the song that is the tune is familiar to us, but the newer song, “Oh Love, Who Form’st Me to wear the image of thy Godhead here,” that was able to be put into the format it is by Joseph and so we are very appreciative for that and you’ll have noticed that both in that song and then in the one we just sang we have this theme of God’s love for us and that is what I’ll be talking about today based on Romans 8:29 and 30 and that’s also why we chose the processional song about the relationship of Jesus and his bride and coming to the marriage feast of the Lamb etc on the Lord’s day. So that’s our theme today.

It’ll remain our theme next week. We’ll kind of talk about some of the implications of God’s setting his love upon us in eternity for married life and setting our love upon one another. I want to begin today. We’re going to be talking just on Romans 8:29 and 30, but I actually want to read the entire chapter, Romans 8. You know, if you were given the choice to be on a desert island and only had one chapter of the Bible or two, which ones would you want?

Well, many, many people who are very familiar with their Bibles would say that Romans 8 is certainly at the top of the list. A chapter of great comfort, great encouragement to us. So, please stand and I’ll read all of Romans chapter 8.

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the spirit. For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh on account of sin. He condemned sin in the flesh that the righteous requirements of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the spirit.

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the spirit, the things of the spirit. For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.

So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh but in the spirit, if indeed the spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the spirit of Christ, he is not his. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness.

But if the spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his spirit who dwells in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die. But if by the spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

For as many as are led by the spirit of God, these are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you receive the spirit of adoption, by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.” The spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God. And if children then heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with him, that we may also be glorified together.

For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it in hope, because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. For we were saved in this hope. But hope that is seen is not hope. For why does one still hope for what he sees?

But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance. Likewise, the spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the spirit himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

Now he who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the spirit is because he makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to his purpose.

For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover, whom he predestined, these he also called. Whom he called, these he also justified. And whom he justified, these he also glorified.

What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies.

Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died and furthermore is also risen who is even at the right hand of God who also makes intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation or distress or persecution or famine or nakedness or peril or sword?

As it is written, “For your sake we are killed all the day long. We are counted as sheep for the slaughter.” Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Let’s pray. Father, we thank you for your love. We thank you for the sureness of that love to us. And we thank you because of that love that we are safe, secure, that this golden chain of things that you accomplished for us, because of your great love for us, resulting in our eternal glorification is set and secure and cannot be altered. We thank you, Lord God, for your great love for us. We thank you for the way you link this text—your love, your sovereignty, and the work of your Holy Spirit in and through us.

Bless us now as we seek to understand these verses in Jesus name we ask it. Amen.

Please be seated. It’s my intent today to begin a series of sermons on the sovereignty of God. As I said earlier this year, this year we want to stress some of the distinctives of our church and what we believe that are so very important for who we are as a people and a congregation. Things that are sort of fundamental to an understanding of the Christian faith and yet things that in a systematic way we don’t often communicate to the next generation and we ourselves need reminding of these things as well.

So I’ll begin this series today talking of the sovereignty of God and what I’ll use as the structuring device for these sermons are the Canons of Dort. So we’ll talk about that in a couple of minutes. The Canons of Dort set forth the sovereignty of God particularly in reference to salvation. You know, how do people become saved and they stress the sovereignty of God. Now, this is so we’re going to be talking about Calvinism, I guess you could say. Some people call it that—TULIP, five points of Calvinism—and we’re going to be talking about unconditional election, the sovereignty of God as it relates to us, etc.

Now some people say that these are things that ought to be saved for private discussions with mature Christians, that it’s really not good to tell new Christians and to talk much about these things. I beg to disagree with that and I disagree with it because our Savior in John chapter 6 told a whole group of people that he was evangelizing these very truths. Let me just read a few verses. John 6:37. Jesus says, “All that the Father gives me will come to me. All that the Father gives me will come to me and the one who comes to me I will by no means cast out.”

And then in verse 44, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him and I will raise him up at the last day.” So you can’t come to me unless the Father draws me. I don’t know if you notice in the text from Romans 8, but it said the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God. Neither can it be.

So apart from the grace of the Holy Spirit and his work that we’re going to be talking about today, those in the old man cannot be subject to God, nor will they be subject to God. The carnal mind is not and cannot be subject to the law of God.

And here Jesus says that the emphasis is that you cannot come to God unless he draws you. But remember that the context for this or the rest of the scriptures tell us that you will not come to God unless God grants it to you. The question is not whether man have a will or a choice. The question is what will he do with that choice? And the scriptures are emphatic over and over again that he will always choose to suppress the image of God, the truth of God and unrighteousness. He will always choose not to submit himself to God. That’s his nature. He will act according to that fallen nature.

We’re not saying he doesn’t have a choice. He has a choice. He’ll always exercise the wrong choice apart from the grace of God calling him. So he cannot and he will not subject himself to God and no one can come to me, Jesus said, unless the Father who sent me draws him and it almost has the connotation of pulling, kicking and screaming from a certain perspective. It’s the same word when you draw in Jesus later at the end of John’s gospel he draws in a heavy load of fish—difficult work drawing him.

And then in verse 65 of chapter 6 he said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to me unless it has been granted to him by my Father.” Now Jesus was talking about unconditional election. Jesus was talking about the sovereignty of God in saving some and not saving others. And he was doing it in a very public setting. And he was doing it in the context of evangelism of a whole multitude of people who were looking for help. So our Savior saw fit to talk about the sovereignty of God relative to salvation in public settings and in evangelism. And I believe we should as well.

We say that one way to put this: God’s sovereignty means his perfect and total government of him in and through all things and this sovereignty is openly taught. Let me read a few other verses. So what we’re saying to begin with is God is sovereign in everything. We’re going to talk about its application of salvation in a few minutes. But just first of all, God has in the words of Reformation Covenant Church’s confession has decreed whatsoever comes to pass; he has uh decreed ordained whatever comes to pass.

And a verse that we can use to put this in its strongest possible statement—it has to do with the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ. The worst sin we could say from one perspective of mankind in all history, is God sovereign over that act? Well, the Bible says clearly he is. In Acts 2:23, the preacher says, “Jesus being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God. You have taken by lawless hands have crucified and put to death.”

God’s sovereignty, man’s responsibility in relationship to the worst thing that men ever did. And the thing that God—it says here—brought this to pass according to his predetermined purpose and his foreknowledge. God decrees whatsoever comes to pass. And that includes the arrest, trial, and crucifixion of his son.

In Genesis 50:19 and 20, Joseph says to his brothers, “Do not be afraid, for am I in the place of God. But as for you,” now he’s talking to his brothers about many years before how they had killed him—not literally, they thrown him to a pit, sent him into slavery, etc. And Joseph says this: he says, “As for you, you meant evil. You intended this for evil against me, your actions in throwing me in the pit and selling me into slavery. But God intended it for good. God didn’t react to it. He intended it for good. God decreed it for well-being.”

It’s a picture of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ. We could say by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers. Now, they’re responsible. Says in Acts, lawless hands you put to death. You’re responsible. But all overriding all of this, God intends these this for good in order to bring it about as it is this day to save many people alive for the purpose of saving the world from famine and hunger and bringing Pharaoh and others to a knowledge of Yahweh. God intended decreed the death, so to speak, imprisonment of Joseph and then his coming forth.

Isaiah 46:9-11, “Remember the former things of old, for I am God and there is no other. I am God and there is none like me. Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things that have not yet been done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand. I will do all my pleasure.’ Calling a bird of prey from the east, the man who executes my counsel from a far country. Indeed, I have spoken it. I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it. I will also do it.”

God has decreed whatsoever comes to pass. And in his providence, he fulfills that decree. Reformation Covenant Church’s statement number two of our confessional statement says, “We believe that God has declared himself to be and is absolute sovereign over all his creation. We believe that he has decreed whatsoever comes to pass and that he in his providence upholds and sustains all things and effects his decree.” That’s our confessional statement. That’s what we believe.

I got a little book at home, “What’s a Reformed Church?” Well, one of the first things it talks about is the sovereignty of God. A reformed church is a church that believes in the sovereignty of God as we’re talking about it this morning. God forbid that the children of this church end up in churches that do not affirm the sovereignty of God. That would be a disaster from my perspective. That’s what we don’t want. It is fundamental to the Christian faith. Our view of who God is fundamental to our Christian life. And the scriptures over and over again declare that God is sovereign, absolutely sovereign.

We built we kind of paraphrase the Westminster Confession of Faith in our confessional statement. Let me read from it. These are this is the historic document produced in the 17th century to define what the Christian faith is all about, what reformed theology is. Chapter 3 is on God’s eternal decree. We read this:

“God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass. Yet so as thereby, neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.”

This is a deep truth. But if you meditate on this, how else could man have choice apart from the ordination of God? If we were just sort of created in the context of an environment, we’d be controlled by that thing unless the Lord God established our choice. So he actually establishes the will of mankind by his ordination.

Paragraph two of this says, “Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions, so he has omniscience, he knows yet has he not decreed anything because he foresaw it as future? or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions. God’s decree is not contingent upon what men will end up doing. No conditions.

“You see, three: ‘By the decree of God for the manifestation of his glory. So they’re saying if you don’t believe this, if you teach contrary to it, if your life lives like you live your lives contrary to it, you’re diminishing the glory of God. For the manifestation of his glory. Some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life and others for ordained to everlasting death.’ This is the orthodox faith once delivered. This is the faith of the early ecumenical councils of the church in the first five centuries of the church. This is the faith declared by the Westminster divines. This is the faith that is declared by the Canons of Dort, which we’ll be discussing for a while.

Now, the Canons of Dort on your outline, I’ve got a little history of the Canons of Dort. First of all, in Acts 15, we have biblical justification for summoning different groups of churches together calling church councils determining things that are then sent out authoritatively to the rest of the churches. Acts 15, you know, men have gone down from Jerusalem. They convene a council at Jerusalem to talk about whether circumcision is required of Christians or not. What’s our relationship to the law? People convene together. It’s a church synod. The very first ecumenical synod that we know of recorded in scripture and then they send out a message to the rest of the churches saying it seems good to us and to the Holy Spirit that you do this is the faith. That doesn’t mean, you know, we sort of read that huh, you can do it or not do it, no, if you look at the use of the term, it seems good to the Holy Spirit means better do it, this is what the Holy Spirit is saying to the churches, that’s what they said of their official pronouncements of the Jerusalem council based on that, as I said earlier, the ecumenical councils of the first five centuries of the church in like manner would gather together and say, “What’s the faith?”

Heresies would be out there. People that said, “No, no, it’s free will and God doesn’t determine ahead of time anything. He’s that’s contingent upon us.” People would say that Jesus isn’t really God or Jesus wasn’t really man. Then the churches would get together and they would decide authoritatively what the truth of the scriptures is on a particular matter. They would send out those pronouncements, put it in writing, and that’s what goes on at the Synod of Dordt or Dort.

Why do we have two names? Well, yeah, Dort was the English familiar term for the town in South Holland called or the city called Dordrecht. So, Dordrecht is the term they would use in Holland. Dort was the colloquialism used in England for this city. So, sometimes you usually hear it called the Canons of Dort because we’re an English-speaking people. So, at Dort, they had a get together. The churches came together to deal with particular teachings.

And as I’ve got in your outline, there was a man named Jacob Arminius, who is also referred to as Jacobus, which is like the Latin term for James. Arminius. You know, names back then were different. You had your given born name and frequently you would take a Latin name. Zacharias Ursinus wrote a commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism. It’s not his real name. Ursinus was he was like bearlike in his strength. So he became like earth sign like or something. I don’t know. These names are confusing to us but this particular man Jacob Arminius is Jacob’s Arminius and he taught in the late 16th century in Holland and he actually died before his teachings were spoken about at the council of Dort.

He but he taught that the Belgic Confession so you know we think of the Westminster Confession. But the other standards of reformed churches on the continent were the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and eventually these documents we’re talking about here, the Canons of Dort. These are the standards, the confessions that the reformed churches of continental Europe said reflected the system of doctrine taught in the scriptures.

Well, Arminius and his followers said that the Belgic Confession is wrong about certain things and they began to teach it secretly to their students at seminary etc. He was a very bright and gifted instructor but he began to teach against the Belgic Confession not openly and publicly but privately. After his death his followers who are referred to as the Remonstrants on your outline, they wrote up their objections to the Belgic Confession in 1610. So remonstrate—to remonstrate is to speak against something. So you know your parents say take out the garbage. Well, let me remonstrate against that and ask you if maybe I couldn’t do it. Don’t have to do it. So, remonstrate.

So, these guys wrote up a Remonstrance, their objections to the Belgic Confession and gave it to the church, the extended reformed church in Holland and said, “This is what we believe. We believe the Belgic Confession is wrong because of these particular things.” This caused controversy. And then finally, at the request of James I of England, the James the first of the King James Bible, not a good guy. But I bring this up because, you know, the effects were not just localized in Holland of the teaching of Arminianism. You know, remember Arminianism and Armenian is different from an Armenian.

An Armenian is someone who comes from Armenia, a country. An Arminian is someone who teaches the same thing that Arminius has taught or his followers taught or at least are generally categorized with those people. So, James the I—it was troubling you know the whole European world and England and Scotland as well. These doctrines they were you know just as you know Arianism in the early centuries of the church was a problem needed to be addressed. We have this problem here and James I strongly encouraged the magistrates of Holland to convene this synod.

Now just like Acts 15 and the early church councils it was not just the church in Holland that was deciding this stuff or talking about it. It was an international convocation. There were representatives, voting representatives been involved in the dialogue, the discussion, what are we going to say, writing it all up from England, Scotland, the Palatinate, Hesse, Brandenburg, Switzerland, Geneva, Bremen, Emden. So there were lots of different countries represented here including Anglicans from the Church of England and the reformation that was going on in England at the time. So it’s not a limited sectarian little deal. It’s very akin to an ecumenical council.

That wasn’t totally like the ecumenical councils because not everybody was there. All the churches weren’t represented. So it’s, you know, it’s not an ecumenical council like the early church councils and it’s not just a gathering of the Holland churches. It’s something in between that where lots of reformed churches were represented. The Lutherans weren’t, however, for instance.

So they began their meeting with prayer and fasting and they took an oath before God to discern the truth of the scriptures and they met for about six months from November in 1618 and then they finally concluded in May of 1619. By the way, one of the other things that they decided to do is to produce a Dutch version of the Bible taken from the original languages in Hebrew and Greek. So there was another side benefit. They actually had an accurate Dutch version of the Bible based on the original languages.

Now, the Remonstrants, the guys that objected to the Belgic Confession, they wrote up their objections in five sections, paragraphs or sections, I guess is better, not paragraphs, but sections. And the term that you’ll hear used is there were five heads of doctrine. So, five sections with headers at the top. And they said, “Well, these are the five things that we think the Belgic Confession has wrong.”

And the response of the synod—Synod means a convocation of the churches. The response were the Canons or laws of the churches. Canon just means law or standard. They decided that the Remonstrants were all wrong. And so they wrote their response to the Remonstrance to their five heads of doctrine in basically five sections as well. Though as your outline shows, sections three and four of the Remonstrance was combined into one section from the Canons of Dort.

And so the Remonstrants, you know, rejected the idea that God sovereignly elected people. Instead, the Remonstrants said God elects people based on foreseen faith. So they said that God looks down history and you know, he sees Don Rogers and he sees Don and then at some point in Don’s life, Don says yes to Jesus and then God says, “Okay, I choose him. He foresees faith in Don and chooses him on the basis of that faith. That’s what Remonstrant said.

And so the first head of doctrine, the response to that spoke about divine election and reprobation. So the first head of doctrine, the first Canons of Dort, the first section was about election. And a summary way of saying it, they didn’t put it this way, but a summary way of saying is they taught unconditional election. That God’s election choice of us is not conditioned upon anything in the creature, not foreseen faith certainly or anything else that God foresaw.

So that’s unconditional election.

The second head of doctrine has to do with the death of Christ. The Remonstrance said that Jesus died for everybody, made atonement for everybody’s sins. And the church said, “No, that’s not orthodox. That’s heterodox. That’s wrong. Makes you a false believer if you believe that stuff.” In point of fact, the death of Christ was for his people. So the second section was called the death of Christ and the redemption of men thereby. And this has become known as limited atonement. Not limited in its value or but limited in who Jesus died for. He died specifically for his sheep as the scriptures clearly teach.

So they said, “No, you guys are wrong with unlimited atonement. Jesus died for his those that he has chosen to salvation.” And then sections three and four of the Canons talked about the corruption of man, his conversion to God, in its manner and the manner thereof. So you know depravity—they said you know the Armenians said, the Remonstrance said man is not totally depraved some parts of him aren’t fallen and the orthodox church said that’s wrong the sin the fall of man affected every part of his being so he’s not as bad as he could be but he’s totally in all his totality depraved or fallen and the Remonstrance said that the grace of God that calls him into salvation can be resisted.

And the Orthodox faith once delivered again at Dort said that the corruption of man is total and that his conversion to God results from irresistible grace. God’s grace—he draws people to himself is you know from this perspective irresistible. Can’t resist it.

And then the last head is called the perseverance of the saints. And you know this again was placed in the context of God’s sovereignty. So what we have here are the classic formulation that’s come to be known as TULIP. You know, total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, perseverance of the saints. But really, it wasn’t TULIP. It was ALTI—actually ALT—because the first thing they talked about was unconditional election. From there, they moved to limited atonement or Christ’s redemption of men by his death. Then they talked about the depravity of man, the irresistible grace of God. Because of that depravity and the perseverance of the saints that God brings to pass.

So ALTI really is the order of the Canons of Dort. Now the important part of this is that this is not just some sort of suggestion to the churches. I believe well clearly what the Canons of Dort attempted to do what all the reformed churches and all these countries that were there attempted to do is to say this is the orthodox faith. If you don’t believe this stuff you’re a heretic like Arius, like Pelagius, like all kinds of guys earlier.

And they weren’t coming up with something new. They were defending the Belgic Confession. And the Belgic Confession was simply a restatement of Augustine’s theology in the early centuries of the church and the findings of the ecumenical creeds and councils in the first five centuries. So the point is this is a you know because evil gets more sophisticated refuting evil has to get more exact and precise. So there’s a preciseness to this that the Belgic Confession didn’t have a need to articulate nor the early church council.

It’s like God creation of the world in six days. You know it was okay to say God created the world back in the early church. Everybody knew what it meant. And then some people said well he created it but not in six days. So then they had to say he created the world in six days. But then people get fancy dancy. Well what’s a day? Day’s a thousand years. Who knows what that is? So now we got to say six days of ordinary length. Okay? So we’re not saying anything new. We’re saying what we always said. We’re saying it with more precision. And the Canons of Dort are like that. They’re saying with more precision what the church has always taught.

What I’m saying is, you know, we look at it today as kind of a choice. Should we go to a Baptist Arminian church or shall we go to a Calvinistic church? What should we do? And they’re both about the same. Should we marry an Arminian guy. Is that okay? No, it’s not okay. There’s a radical distinction. Now, in our day and age, people don’t know this stuff and so everybody’s kind of made it a choice and nobody really understands the implications of what they’re saying anymore.

What I’m trying to tell you is this church is committed to will always be committed to as long as it lasts to a view of the sovereignty of God that is articulated in the Canons of Dort by the Belgic Confession, by the Westminster Confession of Faith, by our confession of faith, by the early church councils and by the holy word of God as it is clearly articulated these positions in it. That’s what we believe. That’s what we’ll always believe. And we’re always going to believe that it’s wrong to go join some church that doesn’t hold to these views of the sovereignty of God.

And it’s particularly wrong to put our children in the context of teaching, having them become involved in other churches where this doctrine is taught against. It’s a big deal. I wanted to read here what article nine of this first head of doctrine of the Canons said. “This election is not based on foreseen faith, the obedience of faith, holiness or any other good quality or disposition as a cause or condition in man required for being chosen. But men are chosen to faith, the obedience of faith, holiness, and so on. Election, therefore, is the fountain of every saving good. from which flow faith, holiness, and other saving gifts. And finally, eternal life itself as the fruits and effects.”

“This the apostle teaches when he says, ‘He chose us not because we were, but that we should be holy and blameless before him.’” Ephesians 1:3-6 says, “Blessed be the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy. So he chose us before the foundation of the world that we should be holy. He didn’t choose us on the basis of the holiness and without blame before him in love having predestinated us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to himself.”

And it’s this love that Ephesians talks about that he’s done all this stuff in his love that I want to talk about today from Romans 8:29 and 30. So we’re on the second part of the outline, sovereignty and love, the golden chain.

So this is called the golden chain because these five elements are all linked together. They’re golden. They’re beautiful. They’re most precious to us as a source of comfort and hope and enabling us to persevere. They’re a wonderful thing and they’re links in a chain. And the very first link in the chain is what I want to talk about today. The eternal council of God is set forth in verse 29. And the relation and time of God’s plan is set out in verse 30.

And the the context for all this, which is why I read Romans 8, is the work of the spirit in us. This is what the spirit of God is doing. This is what God’s spirit did in eternity. He foreknew us and predestined us. And this is what he does in time. He calls us. He justifies us. And he glorifies us. Okay? And I want to focus in on the very beginning of this chain. Because this is the source of confusion. It was for the Remonstrants and it is for many people today.

The saints are foreknown. For whom he did foreknow all the rest of this great stuff happens to. What does it mean whom he did foreknow? And as you heard in the reputation the Arminian said he foreknew that you will have faith. That’s what he foreknew. What does it mean here to foreknow? Does it mean foreknow or does it mean for love? Could mean foreknow. Lots of verses where this idea of seeing ahead of time—God foreknows everything of course it could refer to some sort of intellectual knowledge of God about a future event.

It can legitimately be that in the Greek or it could be fore love because over and over again in the scriptures to know something isn’t always referred to as an intellectual knowledge of something but rather it means to set your special regards upon something to love them. Adam knew his wife loves her. You men are going to be exhorted next week to set your love afresh on your wives and wives to their husbands. And that’s you know what can be replied by this word knowledge frequently particularly in the Old Testament the word knowledge means love to set one’s special affection upon.

So there’s lots of verses I’ve given you here in which the word is used in this particular way. In Romans 11, God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know the scripture says of Elijah? And he goes on to talk about Elijah and how God has preserved to himself his people. So there’s a and then in verse six, that he saved this remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace that it is no longer of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it’s of works, it’s no longer grace. Otherwise, work is no longer works.

So in that text in Romans, he’s talking about the fore love of God because he’s eliminating all possibility of anything based on the person. He’s talking not about his foreknowledge of them in the sense of knowing them. He’s talking about loving them and thus preserving them.

Psalm 1 verse 6 is a good way to remember this. “For the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish.” Doesn’t he intellectually know the steps of the ungodly? Well, of course. What does it mean? He knows the way of the righteous. He puts his special affection on them. He loves them in a way that he doesn’t love the unrighteous ones.

1 Corinthians 8:3, “If anyone loves God, this one is known by him.” Doesn’t make any sense. If anyone loves God, this one is intellectually discerned by God. No. If anyone loves God, it’s because God loved him first, right? It’s a responsive love to the love of God. If anyone loves God, this one is loved by God or known by him.

Amos 3:2, “You only talking to Israel, have I known of all the families of the earth. So I know you, I’ve set my love on you, unlike all the rest of the families of the earth. By the way, the verse goes on to say, “Therefore, I’ll punish you for all your iniquities.” So it’s a chastening love, but the discipline of God is put in the context of love.

And that’s what I’m trying to do with this doctrine of sovereignty. The doctrine of God’s sovereignty is sometimes treated as a doctrine for arguing about an intellectual erudite sort of a thing. But the sovereignty of God that’s spoken of in Romans is a sovereignty that is rooted has its basis not in you know a cold uncaring fatalistic God but rather in a God who sets his love and affection upon his people.

The proper context of sovereignty is the love of God.

In Matthew 7:23 “Then I’ll declare to them I never knew you unto the unrighteous guys. Jesus is saying at the end I’ll declare to them I never knew you. Depart from me you who practice lawlessness.” He’s not using an intellectual sense, obviously.

Genesis 18:19, God speaking of Abraham, “For I have known him in order that he may command his children and his household after him, that they keep the way of the Lord. It doesn’t I know him that he will do this. I know I have known him to the end that he will command his children and his household after him.” Again, there the obvious sense of the term is God’s love for Abraham.

Jeremiah 1:5, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. Before you were born, I sanctified you. I ordained you as a prophet to the nations.” So God again setting his love on Jeremiah the prophet in eternity past.

So that can be the sense in which this is used. Again, Hosea 13:5, “I knew you in the wilderness in the land of great drought.” He doesn’t mean he intellectually knows him. He say put his love upon him.

Galatians 4:9. “Now, after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements to which you desire again to be in bondage?” After you were intellectually discerned by God, why do you turn from that? Now, clearly there the idea is once you’ve loved God or better been loved by him because that’s what produces your love, why would you turn away from this one who has loved you so much and whom you know you loved in response?

2 Timothy 2:19, “Nevertheless, the solid foundation of God stands having this seal. The Lord knows those who are his. Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.” He knows, he has his love upon those who are his. It’s a distinctive knowledge. So, it can’t be an intellectual knowledge as such.

“Behold, what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us,” 1 John 3. “That we should be called children of God. Therefore, the world does not know us because it did not know him.” Well, the world knows us. They know we’re here. I heard a show yesterday on C-SPAN. They’re talking about how to get rid of us. They’re talking about how archaic we are. Those that believe in the Bible, they want to marginalize us. They should treat us just like astrologers. They said there a debate going on, but everybody agreed. Not that they don’t know we’re here, but they don’t love us because they don’t love us because they don’t love God.

Now I want to argue that’s the way in which this term is used. Now even if it is a foreknowledge of faith, I don’t think it is, but an intellectual ascent to intellectual discernment on God’s part of faith, it doesn’t make any difference because the faith that would be foreseen the Bible over and over again—I give you some references here—is the faith that God himself creates. You can’t work up faith. Faith is the gift of God. God, lest anyone should boast.

So, it’s not I don’t think it is. And I’ll tell you why I don’t think it is. But even if it did speak here of intellectual discernment of faith being the basis for God’s predestination, it wouldn’t make any difference in terms of his sovereignty as opposed to our determining things. Because the only faith he would see is the stuff that he’s brought to pass. He gave it to you. It’s a gift. He didn’t give it to somebody else. So, you see, even if it is foreign knowledge of a sense of intellectual knowledge. It doesn’t make any difference. God is still sovereign. The intellectual knowledge is not of something in us that differentiates us by our choice. It’s by something that he caused to come to pass.

Okay. So, let’s look over the reasons now as to why I think that uh this is referring to love and not intellectual ascent.

By the way, I wanted to quote from John Murray who taught at Princeton and then taught at Westminster Theological Seminary. Great reformed man of the past century. He said this: “It’s certainly true that God foresees faith. I mean, if you want to think of it that way, not in this verse, but it’s true that God foresees all that comes to pass. The question would then simply be whence precedes this faith which God foresees. And the only biblical answer is that the faith which God foresees is the faith he himself creates. Hence, his eternal foresight of faith is preconditioned by his decree to generate that faith in those whom he foresees as believing.”

“It should be observed that the text says whom he foreknew. Whom is the object of the verb and there is no qualifying addition. This of itself shows that unless there is some other compelling reason, the expression whom he foreknew contains within itself the differentiation.” So what I put this in simpler language on your outline. Here’s the evidence to interpret this as fore love.

**Verse 29A is a differentiating statement about whom, not what.** It’s a differentiating statement. God knows all men. But here he’s talking about knowing certain men and not knowing others. So he doesn’t say “you know those whom he foreknew the faith of”—he says those whom he foreknew in opposition to some other people who aren’t going to be glorified and justified and called and predestined okay so it’s a differentiation of someone, a whom not a what. God knows certain men in other words and he doesn’t know other men. Got to mean love can’t mean intellectual knowledge because he knows everybody.

**Secondly, exegesis as opposed to isogesis demands the simplest interpretation.** This is what John Murray was getting at. We can’t go inserting things in the verse that we want to put there, right? We can’t say, well, it really means those whom he foreknew. It doesn’t mean actually people. It means actions. And in fact, it’s actions that have to bring into the text from outside. Isogesis means to read into a text of scripture what we want to see there. Exegesis draws out of the text of scripture what is the meaning of it? And in when you determine a meaning of something, the simplest interpretation is what you want to look for. Not always the case. You got to bring in other parts of scripture sometimes. But the simplest statement here of it is that it is not a foreknowledge of some action. It is a foreknowledge of some people as opposed to others. And it’s not a foreknowledge that has you know the faith of added inserted in there. No, exegesis demands the simplest interpretation.

The simplest interpretation is that God is knowing some people, not their actions and not others. And those people are the ones then that aren’t intellectually known. It must be the other sense of the word know to set one loves one’s love apart.

**Third, faith, good works are concurrent with his call. All are effects of predestination.** This kind of builds off what I just said. Even if it was faith, wouldn’t make any difference because his faith is his sovereign action giving it to us. But it’s worse than that. Because if it’s foreknowledge, it’s based on faith. We got an endless loop set up here that we can’t get out of.

Acts 13:46 says, “Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” So as many has been appointed or predestinated for chosen to eternal life, they’re the ones who exercise faith and believed.

Ephesians 2:10, “We are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” So he prepares beforehand the work that we should walk in it.

2 Timothy 1:9, “Who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began.” So you see, God’s predestination of us is the basis for giving us faith in time. So we can’t say that God chose those who had faith in time and on the basis of the knowledge of that faith, he then predestinates them. It’s reverse. You see, gets us in an endless loop of logic that just won’t work. So it can’t be that.

Charles Hodge, a much earlier professor at Princeton Theological Seminary, said this: “Some people supply something to make the sense complete. ‘who he foreknew would repent and believe’ or ‘who would not resist his divine influence’ for some such idea. There are two objections to this matter or explaining the passage. One, the addition of this clause is entirely gratuitous and if unnecessary, it is of course improper. That’s the simplest interpretation line of argumentation here. There is no such thing said and therefore it should not be assumed without necessity to be implied. Why do people put that in there? Because they don’t want a sovereign God. They want to be God. They want to be in charge of their eternal destiny. They want to be in charge of the world. Everybody wants to rule the world, but we don’t get to. God’s in charge. That’s the basic question of God’s sovereignty. Who’s in charge? People read that into this text because they want to be in charge. They don’t want God in charge.

“Two, he says it’s in direct contradiction to the apostle’s doctrine. It makes the ground of our calling and election to be something in us, our works. Whereas Paul clearly says that such is not the ground of our being chosen. To say that faith as distinguished from works is what is foreseen and constitutes the ground of election does not help the matter because faith is a work and it is a work of God. Faith is a work. It’s a work or an action that we engage in but ultimately God’s the one that causes it to come to pass. So, you know, it doesn’t do any good to say, well, he didn’t foresee good works. He foresaw faith. But faith is a work or an action on our part, you see, and it’s given to us by the grace of God.

**D context stresses God’s action. Man’s passivity.** This is a foreknowledge that determines existence doesn’t flow from existence. “Whom God foreknew whom he God predestinated. God called us. God justifies us. God glorifies us.” The whole point here is you know that is looking back to those chosen by God. God, right? all things work together for good to those that are chosen by God. That’s comes immediately before our text. It’s those who are chosen again by the actions of God that all things work together for good. So throughout this portion of Romans, God is the one who is acting all the time, not man. It would be quite odd for God to insert here an action of men when the whole point of the text is the sovereignty, the action of God.

**And then finally, it’s not superfluous with predestination.** In Jeremiah 31:3, “The Lord has appeared of old to me, saying, ‘Yes, I have loved you with an everlasting love. Therefore, with loving kindness, I have drawn you.’” So, some people say, “Well, if it’s just for love, that’s the same as predestinate.” No, it isn’t. You know, I look around the room. I looked around a room many years ago and I saw a woman and I loved her. She became my wife. After I saw her. I made a plan. Got to go after this girl. That’s what you’re supposed to do, guys. You’re supposed to be active in that. Don’t sit back and wait for somebody to love you. No, you go out there pursuing the way Jesus did.

Well, that’s what God does. He from before eternity, in eternity rather, before time starts, he thought of Don and Bonnie, Matt and Karen. He thought of our children, Zachary. He thought of Benjamin and Elijah. He thought of all of us, you see, and he put his special eye or look upon us and look of love. And on the basis of that love for you, then he determined ahead of time that you were going to be his people. Then on the basis of that love, he made this plan that he then worked in time to call you. His predestination of you is, in other words, determining what your life will be.

You know, it’s kind of a sometimes it’s a bad word like destiny, fate, fatalism. That’s not the way it works. And the Canons of Dort are quite clear. It talks about how God doesn’t treat us as stocks and blocks of wood. No, it’s not like that. God loves us, but then he begins to work with us to give us a destination to bring us to that place. He begins to work his plan.

So this foreknowledge of God is differentiated from predestination. And I’m so glad that it is. Because it says that behind the sovereignty of God and salvation, which is the Orthodox faith once delivered, is not some cold, uncaring, predestinating God. Behind the predestination of God is love. It’s the great love of God that looks upon certain people with regard. Not because they’re beautiful. Not the way I did with Christine. Something about me her attracted me to. But he sets his love upon us in eternity. It’s this great love of God that’s the basis for the sovereignty of God.

And on the basis of that love, then he does all kinds of things. Then he predestines us. He in time effectually calls us, gives us a vocation in the world, makes us uh justified through the work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Declares that to our account. He gives us the gifts of faith. You know, we exercise that faith which is the gift of God, not of works. We’re justified in God’s sight because of the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, his death and resurrection, and we’re glorified.

You notice that glorified is not “he will glorify.” Now, there’s that sense to it, right? We’re going to come to a haven. I thought about it this morning as we were singing “Wake Awake.” You know, eye has not seen nor ear heard, but God has prepared for us in eternal glory. A wonderful stuff coming. Don’t want to lose sight of that. But the glorification that’s talked about here is passed. It’s already happened. Now, there’s a sense in which whatever God does is done eternally. But I think too there’s a sense in which our glorification has already begun. God has already given us many good things.

So God’s great sovereign love lies behind his sovereignty. And I wanted to begin this discussion of one of the distinctives of our church with that sort of an emphasis. Notice that he predestinates us to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ. Suffering is in the text of Romans 8, right? It’s he’s going to come back to it after this section. The next few verses are going to talk about all the difficulties we have in this life. And he provides comfort in suffering, assurance that it’ll be okay in the end. And assurance that through our suffering, God is with us.

What’s the basis for the giving us the great comfort we have in the midst of the difficulties that otherwise would sometimes be absolutely overwhelming to us, unbearable. The basis for us being conformed to the image of Christ’s suffering and then receiving Christ’s glory? That’s what the text earlier talked about—that he suffered and then was glorified. The basis for that is a sure apprehension of the love of God undergirding every event in our life.

Before we were born, before we were created, before we were formed in the womb, the Lord God loved us. That love sees us through all the vicissitudes of life. God’s plan for us is glorious and it’s a plan that begins and ends with his great love to us.

When we mess around with this doctrine, when we try to make it something other than love, we’re trying to make it better for folks supposedly by making God some kind of, you know, more responsive creature responding to us. When we try to be humanist, we rip out the very core of the comfort of humanity, which is the love of God to us, set upon us in eternity.

The Lord God says, “The sovereignty of God is not, as Calvin said, a doctrine for disputation. It’s not a doctrine that should lead to arguments.” It’s a doctrine, Calvin said, of great comfort to us. It’s comfort because the Lord God set his love upon us in eternity. This is a wonderful truth. I hope that we recognize that the sovereignty of God is not some sort of cold dead doctrine. Just the reverse.

It’s the beating heart of God’s love for his people that moved him then to predestinate us, call us, justify, and sanctify us. The Lord God’s great love is the foundation for our lives.

Augustine, you know, what do we what should we do in relationship to this? What do we do in response to this great truth of God’s love? Well, it talked about it earlier in a few verses. What do we do? Augustine said, “Love God and do as you please.” That’s the application from today’s sermon.

The Lord God has set his great love upon you from eternity. Foreknowledge is for love. From one end of the Bible to the other, the Lord God has affirmed that he’s set his love on a particular people. And that means you. God loves you. Do you sing today? Yeah. You sing to the one whom you love. You love because he first loves you. Believe that the Lord God’s love has been set upon you in eternity. Respond with love to him.

And then, as Augustine said, if you’re responding in love to God, well, you can do whatever you please because you’ll please to please the one who has loved you in eternity past.

Let’s pray. Lord God, we thank you for this golden chain. We thank you for all the wonderful benefits of it. And we thank you that the core of your sovereignty and salvation of us is your great love and foreknowledge of us. Thank you, Father. May we respond in love to you now by bringing forth a demonstration that our lives have been lived in joyful, loving response to you who first loved us. In Jesus name we pray. Amen.