Rediscovering the Lost Doctrine of the Covenant

Session 1: W hat Ever Happened to Covenant Theology? Gregg Strawbridge 1. The State of the Reformed Church - Modernity has been a great test for the Church. If we judge by individulization, secularization, privitization, and the transformation of culture, we must admit that Protestants are the most miserable of all. W e have been shipwrecked by the howling winds of the Enlightenment. The distinctly Reformed theology of covenant theology or federal theology ought to be a great antidote to modernity. W hile other forms of evangelical theology could easily be molded, a covenantal view would seem to be deeply against such currents as, individulization, secularization, and privitization. However, churches which explicitly endorse covenant theology are ostensibly not much better than others. W e are individualistic and have privitized religion, as is evident by our crisis conversion model of salvation, our emotionally driven expressions of worship, and our individualistic sacramentology. W e are largely secularized without a clear sense of the antithesis between the Christian worldview and competing claims for Lordship. The fact that we do not see claims of knowledge and factuality as a matter of Lordship testify to the problem. The Protestant church, for the most part, has abdicated responsibility for the transformation of culture, in favor of a monkey-see, monkey-do following of pop culture only 15 years afterward, with less proficiency. W e have fallen far from the tree of own heritage of the Reformation, by engaging in the further gnostification of the Church. The pungent reproof of Philip J. Lee should be heard. The irony of Protestant history is that although the sixteenth-century Reformers fought like tigers to restore the wine to the people, their descendants have now deprived the people of both bread and wine. The Protestant celebration, when it is on rare occasions held, has been spiritualized to the extent that it could scarecly be recognized as a meal at all. The purely symbolic wafer of the Roman celebration, which John Knox thundered against as a distortion of Christ's 'common bread' has in most Protestant churches been replaced by minute, carefully diced pieces of bread unlike any other bread ever eaten by any culture. The common cup which the medieval Church withheld from the faithful is, except among Anglicans, still the sole possession of the clergy. The unordained are now given thimble-like glasses filled with W elch's grape juice. The symbolism is quite clear. W e all come before God individually; with our individual bits of bread and our individual cups of juice, we are not of one loaf and one chalice. Our relationship to Christ is private and personal. W hat may be even more significant is that by partaking of this unearthly meal with our unbreadly bread and our unwinely wine we are making a clear statement that the bread and wine of spiritual communion has no connection with earthly communion. Against the Protestant Gnostics (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 272. How W e Got Here from There - Instead of starting at the Reformation, we must also take account of the unfolding Biblical revelation, the early history of the Church. Clearly the foundational revelation in Hebrew Scriptures makes clear a covenantal faith which is militantly opposed to Enlightenment heresy on every front. Likewise the Greek Scriptures of New Testament or New Covenant teach the fulfillment of covenant redemption in Christ. And they testify by their very language, the goal of reaching the world with the gospel announcement that Jesus is the resurrected Lord and has accomplished redemption through the cross. Enter the Greeks. The gnosticizing tendency of Greek thought then becomes one of the first major battle grounds for the church. So we read that the earliest confession says, I believe...in the resurrection of the body. Still many Christians to this day conceive of salvation as being evacuated from this imperfect material existence and going to a place, without a body, which is itself unbodily. Though Greek philosophy had it's head cut off by the Resurrection, nevertheless it's tale kept writhing and made its way into the very foundational actions of the Church, baptism and communion. Grace was conceived as a substance, the sacraments were final determined to be an unearthly substance. Hence the covenantal conception of rites like baptism and eating and drinking were given over for a focus on the Platonic essences. The Reformers inherited this debate and while they came down on the right side, denying the corporeal transubstantiation, they were still answering the questions which Greek philosophy in the form of Romanism put to them, rather than developing a fully renewed reading of the covenant. Though, they made a good start on a covenant theology (Zwingli, Bullinger, Calvin, et al), we now must stand on their shoulders and press the covenant beyond covenant theology. W e have a received covenant theology which is theologically inconsistent in matters such as paedocommunion. Covenant theology has developed into a systematic cul-

2.

Page 1 of 10

3.

de-sac which stands against a deeper biblical theology on issues such as the covenant of works and merit, and which is pastorally weak on worship, sacraments, and the inclusion of children. A Covenantal M anifesto a. The Bible is a covenantal book and the Redemption offered in Christ is only properly understood in reference to covenant. The conception of covenant is so pervasive that defining a covenant is sort of like defining your mother. b. A biblical covenant is a relational bond with promises and obligations, signified with blood rites which is sovereignly administered by the Lord. Biblical covenants differ from contracts in that biblical covenants are sovereignly disposed. They are not a mere agreement between two parties. Scriptural terms which indicate covenant relationships include, promise, oath, and testament. The obligations of the covenant are indicated with terms such as law, commandment, and requirement. Aspects and parameters of the covenant and the covenant's Lord which are clear in Scripture, include the following: i. The true God is the Triune Covenant Lord who reveals Himself by way of covenant and keeps His oaths, yet is not bound by anything outside of Himself (Heb. 6:13, Neh. 9:32). ii. The created order exists because of God's natural covenant (Jer 33:25) and despite sin in the world, is not destroyed because of God's covenant faithfulness (Gen. 6:18). iii. God covenanted with Adam, who represented mankind (Hos. 6:7, 1 Cor. 15:22). iv. After the fall, God's purpose in redemption was revealed as a covenant relationship (Gen. 12, Heb. 13:20). v. The historical covenants, Abrahamic, Noahic, Mosaic, Davidic and new covenants were an administration of God's unfolding redemptive purpose (Heb. 9:26, 2Cor. 1:20). vi. The covenant relationship God made with Abraham included successive generations and immediately applied to each successive believer's household, even new covenant Gentile believers (Gen. 18:19, Acts 16:31, Rom. 4:16). vii. Covenants are expressed and confirmed in both word and rite, promise and sign (Gen. 9:12, 17:11). viii. In the fulness of time, Christ came in fulfillment of the previous covenant promises (Luke 1:68). ix. Christ's death and resurrection were the fulfillment and climax of the previous covenant administrations for the benefit of all nations (Gal. 3:14-17). x. God graciously redeems His people and places them in covenant apart from any merit or achievement on their part (Ex. 19, 1 Cor. 1:26). xi. Those redeemed by grace are required to be faithful and keep covenant. Keeping covenant is a single concept and term for the relationship of faith, repentance, and obedience which God requires (Gen. 17:9, Deut. 17:12, Mark 1:15, Rom. 4:2). xii. The new covenant promises include the transformation of the world by converting the nations to trust and obey Jesus (Matt. 28:19-20, Acts 3:25, Rom. 3:10). xiii. Apostasy is covenant breaking (Deut. 31:16, Heb. 10:29). xiv. The administration of the new covenant, just as in the previous biblical covenants, includes a principle of familial, corporate inclusion or generational succession (Acts 2:39, 1 Cor. 7:14). xv. Marriage is covenantal, both in its commitment nature and in its relational nature, representing Christ and His people (Mal. 2:14, Eph. 5:25). xvi. Keeping covenant for parents requires that their children must be raised in the discipline, education, and culture of Christ, our Lord (Deut. 6:4-7, Eph. 6:4). xvii. Believers' children are in covenant and are therefore obligated to continue in faith and obedience to Christ (2 Tim. 3:14, Eph. 6:1). xviii. The new covenant signs and rites of baptism and communion are to be given to the children of believers since they are included in the covenant (Acts 16:31-34, Acts 2:46, 1 Cor. 10:34). xix. To be a faithful believer ordinarily requires entrance into the covenant relationship by baptism and participation at communion, within the covenanted bonds of membership in a congregation (1Cor 12:13, 1 Pet. 5:2-3). Page 2 of 10

xx.

xxi.

xxii.

xxiii.

xxiv.

Congregational faithfulness ordinarily requires a Lord's Day service which aims to renew covenant relations with the Lord through confession, forgiveness through the gospel, instruction in covenant revelation, warning of covenant sanctions, and Table fellowship with God through the Eucharist (giving thanks) (Deut. 29:21, 1 Cor. 10-11, Acts 20:7). Covenant renewal worship is to be done on the Lord's Day because the Covenant Lord promises to meet with His people as He/they remember His redemptive accomplishment completed on the Day of Resurrection (Lev. 23:3-4, Acts 20:7, Heb. 12:22-24). The New Covenant meal is a Eucharistic celebration of the presence of Christ with His people. It is the climax of the Lord's Day celebration and is emblematic of all lesser tables which are a lesser occasion for gratitude toward the same Coveant Lord who is our Provider and Provision (Luke 22:19, 1 Tim. 4:4). W hile respecting the distinctive callings and providential settings of each congregation's ministry, expression and location, all such Christian churches should purpose to relate to one another as gatherings of the covenant people seeking to fulfill God's purposes, under the general terms revealed in Scripture, respecting the application of covenant blessings and sanctions toward individual covenant members, bearing with one another in the Lord (1Cor. 12:4, Eph. 4;16, 3 John 1:10). Congregations should have broader church counsel and relations through biblically qualified elders/presbyters in covenanted relations to consider matters of faith and life (Acts 15, 21).

Page 3 of 10

Rediscovering the Lost Doctrine of the Covenant

Session 2: The Case for Covenant Baptism Gregg Strawbridge Table 1. Covenantal Inclusion

Covenant (Administration)
Creation/Adamic Noahic Abrahamic (Other Patriarchs) Mosaic Davidic New Covenant Tree of Life Rainbow

Visible Signs

Descendants Included
1Cor. 15:22 Gen. 7:1 Gen. 17:11-13 Gen. 31:54 Ex. 12:24 Ps. 89:3-4 Acts 2:39 1Cor. 10:17, 12:13

Circumcision Sacrifices/Meals Passover *** Baptism (entrance) Lords Supper (continuance)

(blood, then meal)

Table 2. The Relationship of Circumcision and Baptism

Circum cision & Baptism

Circumcision
Cut the flesh Circumcision of Christ Circumcise the heart Union with the Seed Jewish nation/All in such households (males) Cleanse the flesh

Baptism

Ritual Reality Recipients

Washing by the Spirit Cleanse the heart Union with the true Seed Every nation/All in the household (males and females)

As Calvin says, For what will they bring forward to impugn infant baptism that may not be turned back against circumcision? (Institutes of the Christian Religion (Philadelphia, PA: W estminster), 4:16:9, 1331) Table 3. New Covenant Baptisms

Outline of Acts The Gospel Goes To...

Jerusalem, Judea Samaria Ends of the Earth Transition: Apostle Paul (Acts 9) First Gentile: Cornelius (Acts 10) God-fearer: Lydia (Acts 16) New Convert Gentiles: The Jailer (Acts 16), Corinthians (Acts 18) Ephesus (Acts 19)

Baptisms Follow This Outline

3000 Men at Pentecost Eunuch, Samaritans, Simon
Saul (apostle to Gentiles) Cornelius Household Lydias Household Jailers Household M any Corinthians: Crispus H ousehold [inferred] Stephanus Household Gaius 12 Men in Ephesus

Page 4 of 10

Table 4: The Place of Believers Children OT and NT

Old Testament
Duties of Parents Command his children to keep the way of the LORD (Gen 18:19) Honor your father and mother (Exo 20:12) Live long in the land (Exo 20:12) Your son and your grandson might fear the LORD your God, to keep all His statutes (Deu 6:2) As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD (Jos 24:15) I will pour out My Spirit on your offspring (Isa 44:3) To a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments (Deu 7:9) All the men of [Abrahams] household. . .were circumcised (Gen 17:27)

New Testament
Bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Eph 6:4) Obey your parents (Eph 6:2) Live long on the earth (Eph 6:3) Continue in the things [Scripture] you have learned from infancy (2Ti 3:14-15)

Duties of Children Blessings Children Must Obey the Word

Household Leadership Promised Reality

The jailer rejoiced greatly, with all his household (Act 16:34, ASV) For the promise [of the Spirit] is to you and your children (Act 2:39) His mercy is upon generation after generation toward those who fear Him (Luk 1:50)

Duration of Inclusion

Sign of Inclusion

The jailer was baptized, he and all his household (16:33) Cornelius, Lydias, Crispus, Stephanus households, too.

Objections: The basic structure of the Baptist polemic against paedobaptism is that since we have (1) an explicit basis for believers' baptism and (2) since there is no explicit warrant (an example or command) for infant baptism, and since (3) the new covenant is made with exclusively regenerate individuals (and believers' little children cannot be assumed to be regenerate). Answer: (1) to recognize that a million cases of adult converts professing their faith prior to baptism prove nothing, of themselves, regarding the infants of believers (the question at hand). The explicit cases of baptism, when fully considered, are not evidence of the Baptist view since they show continuity with household aministration. (2) Explicit warrant on the baptism of believers' children is lacking in both directions. This question must be settled by the proper application of Biblical teaching. It cannot be settled with a direct appeal to an express text. (3) The paedobaptist, not the antipaedobaptist, possesses explicit warrant for the inclusion of children in the new covenant (Deut. 30:6, Jer. 31:36-37), church (Eph. 1:1/6:1-4, Col. 1:2/3:20, 1 Cor. 7:14), and kingdom (Matt. 19:14, Mark. 10:14, Luke 18:16). Moreover, are all those under the terms of the new covenant regenerate? No. There are many passages which teach the possibility of apostasy from the visible covenant community (Heb. 6:1-4, 10:28-30, John 15:2, 6, Rom. 11:21). There are many passages which teach that the New Covenant has stipulations for judgment (M att. 16:19, 1 Cor. 11:29-30, 34, Heb. 10:30-31, 1 Pet. 4:17). There are many passages which teach that the kingdom includes regenerate and unregenerate (Matt. 8:12, 13:24-31, 41, 47-50, 21:43, 25:1-13, Luke 13:28, Rev. 11:15).

The Judaizer Objection: That baptism has not replaced circumcision can be easily seen from the fact that Paul did not attempt to refute the Judaizers demand that Gentiles be circumcised with the statement, They have no need of circumcision; they have been baptized! You all know that baptism has replaced circumcision as the sign of the covenant! Answer: The apostles actually did teach that these converts were not in need of circumcision precisely because they were truly baptized. Their "Gentile uncleanness" had been removed by the reality, not the ritual, a reality portrayed in circumcision and baptism. When Peter retells of Cornelius' reception he says, "And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit'" (Act 11:16).

Page 5 of 10

Rediscovering the Lost Doctrine of the Covenant

Session 3: The Case for Covenant Communion Gregg Strawbridge 1 Corinthians 10:16-17: The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread. Covenant Continuity - Paul's understanding of participation in Christ, as well as the continuity of God's people with the old covenant Church lead him to reprove the schismatic Corinthians, warning them of judgment. In the course of this, he teaches that we stand in the same place as Israel. They were baptized into Moses ate and drank (1 Cor. 10:1-4). This is drawn as a parallel to the Corinthian sacraments. For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread (1 Cor. 10:17). Body members and communicant members are co-extensive. All that are in the body partake of the bread. If baptized children are in the body, then they may eat of the one bread. This is perfectly consistent with the fact that covenant membership has always and ever included you and your children and covenant content is most fundamentally that the Lord is God to you and your descendants (Gen. 17:7, Deut. 7:9, 30:6, 1 Chr. 16:15, Ps. 103:17, 105:8). Such children were included in the signs and seals of the covenant, including sacrificial meals (Ex. 12:24, Lev. 10:14). This has not changed.

Old Covenant Language

To
be G od to you and to your descendants after you (G en 17:7)

New Covenant Language

[By gospel faith] the prom ise m ay be descendants [Jews & G entiles] (Rom 4:16) certain to all the

I will establish M y covenant between M e and you, and I will m ultiply you exceedingly (G en 17:2) I will b e with you and bless you, for to you and to your descendants I will give all these lands (G en 26:3)

[W hen they return] I w ill m ultiply the descendants of David M y servant (Jer. 33:22-26) I w ill pour out M y Spirit on your offspring, and M y blessing o n your descendants (Is. 44:3) & For the prom ise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world . . .[inclusive of Jews & G entiles] through righteousness of faith (Rom 4:13) I will give them one heart and one way, that they m ay fear M e always, for their own good, and for the good of their children after them . And I will m ake an everlasting covenant with them . . . (Jer. 32:39-40) But this is the covenant which I will m ake . . .If this fixed order departs from before M e, declares the LO RD , Then the o ffspring of Israel also shall cease From being a nation before M e fore ver. . . If this fixed order d eparts . . . then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel (Jer. 31:36-37)

That it m ay go well with you and w ith your children after you , and that you m ay live long on the land which the LO RD your G od is giving you for all tim e (Dt. 4:40)

Your descendants would have been [under M osaic covenant] like the sand, and your offspring like its grains; Their nam e would never be cut off or destroyed from M y presence (Is. 48:19)

Historical Discontinuity: On the Road from Rome? Currently, paedocommunion is not the received tradition of the W est, generally, nor Reformed and Presbyterian traditions specifically. Nevertheless, from the third century there is much evidence showing that the W estern Church regularly communed little children. The earliest express mention of infant baptism is found in Tertullian's De baptismo (A.D. 200-206). Cyprian, on whose shoulders his mantle fell, speaks not only of infant baptism, but also of infant communion as a custom which provoked no scruples (Jewett). Our Protestant Father, Augustine (A.D. 354-430) refers to the ancient and apostolic tradition saying, They are infants, but they share in his table, in order to have life in themselves. W hat happened? The first objections to child communion were in the W est in the high Middle Ages. But it has ever been the practice of the Eastern communions. Historian Philip Schaff says that until the 1200's paedocommunion was the universal practice (East and W est). Two important changes occurred in this period in the distribution of the elements, the abandonment of the communion of children and the withdrawal of the cup from the laity. No doubt Reformed people in every place and time roar as

Page 6 of 10

lions at removing the cup from the people. But why are there no uproars about removing the cup and the bread from covenant children? For it was the same corrupt Church who did both. W hy are we still on the road to Rome ? Contemporary Incontinence: Two objections arise over and over. 1) The argument from Reformed tradition. 2) The alleged criterion of professing the faith before communion (from 1 Cor. 11:27-29). On the first, as demonstrated above, it is our tradition which is in the historical minority on the question. On the second, a moment's contextual consideration of 1 Cor. 11, shows that divisions and schisms are, in fact, what Paul is rebuking. His point is not to prohibit them from coming to the Table. He is not creating classes of body members, some of which can come and others should not. Rather he says, But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup (11:28). He does not say, and let him not eat. The Supper means the unity of the body. Excluding those baptized by one Spirit into one body (1 Cor. 12:13) is exactly contrary to the purpose. It is not of the mature or elite in the body, not the adults or children, not the wise or simple. W hen we divide Christians into communicant and non-communicant we are inadvertently doing exactly what Paul rebukes.

Page 7 of 10

Rediscovering the Lost Doctrine of the Covenant

Session 4: The Practice of Covenant Succession Gregg Strawbridge Genesis 18:19 - For I have chosen him, in order that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice; in order that the LORD may bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him 1. Definition: The doctrine of covenant succession is the Scriptural teaching that the children of believers (covenant children) are expected to succeed in the faith of their parents, and this is accomplished through the divinely ordained means of covenant nurture. The practice of Covenantal Nurture is simply raising children in faith and this this includes: 1) Raising children in their identity as Christians in covenant with God. 2) Training them to love God and worship Him congregationally and in the home. 3) Shaping their minds to see a Christian worldview. Family Expectations: Raising Children in Christ a. Signs and Obedience: W hen the first Gentile households were given the sign of covenant membership, they, just like Abraham, were commanded to bring their children up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Eph. 6:4). An elder in the church, as well as the spiritually mature person, is one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (1Ti 3:4). A ritual act, even though it be ordained of God, is of no use if the spiritual reality is not foundational to the sign. W hat is the spiritual reality behind the sign of entrance into the covenant? For Abraham it is clear that the Lord intended covenant nurture to bring about covenant succession (Gen 18:19). W e must heed that ancient command, You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up (Dt. 6:7). Do you command your children to keep the way of the Lord? Do you teach them diligently to love the Lord their God (Dt. 6:4)? W ithout the reality of leading ones home to Christ, in Christ, and for Christ, the water of baptism is worse than useless, it is condemnatory . b. John Murray wrote, Infant baptism does not relieve parents or guardians, as the case may be, of that solemn responsibility to instruct, warn, exhort, direct and protect the infant members of the Christian church committed to their care. . . .The encouragement derived from a divine promise must never be divorced from the discharge of the obligations involved. It is only in the atmosphere of obligation discharged, in a word, in the atmosphere of obedience to divine commandments, that faith in the divine promise can live and grow. Faith divorced from obedience is mockery and presumption.Why We Baptize Infants (in The Presbyterian Guardian, Vol. 5 1938) Family W orship: The Spiritual Discipline of Covenant Succession a. The Scripture declares that, All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the LORD, and all the families of the nations will worship before Thee (Psa 22:27). Joshua nobly said, As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD (24:15). A baptized child should be a child being brought up in the discipline and admonition of the Lord, whose parents vow, As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. Every person that grows up in a Christian home should be taught Gods W ord from their earliest times. Just like Timothy, each Christian child should be exhorted to continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them; and that from childhood ( brephos) you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus (2Ti 3:14-15). Family Education: The Necessity of Covenantal Education a. Christian parents are responsible for their children's education. Though Christian parents feel trapped today by government-subsidized education, parents, not the federal or state governments, are responsible for the education of their children. And as Christians, it is simply a matter of allegiance to Christ that our children are taught truth and not error. Christians have a belief system which we consider true. Is it too much to want Christian children to be taught that which is consistent with our belief system? That God created the world rather than life from naturalistic causes; that sin is a violation of His law instead of moral relativism; that life is a sacred gift of God Page 8 of 10

2.

2.

3.

b.

instead of the leftovers of choice, and the list goes on. Is it too much to aim for an education which sees all truth as God's truth and which acknowledges His lordship in every field of study (Prov. 3:5-6)? In the final analysis, it is not a mere education preference, but a solemn duty to bring our children up "in the discipline and instruction of the Lord" (Eph. 6:4). One must distinguish between education that is governed by Christian thought and secular/agnostic education (posing as vanilla, values-neutral education). Christian education must be no less than worldview education. A worldview is one's view of all of life, especially the important assumptions and convictions which shape our interpretation of the world. Everyone has a worldview, including those controlling our secular bureaucracy of education. A Christian worldview, in comparison to non-Christian worldviews, requires that every area of life be committed to Christ, sanctified under His lordship, and maintained for His glory. The lordship of Christ in this grand way, over and in all of life, must be evident throughout the curriculum. A mere Bible class or a weekly chapel sprinkled on vanilla education is simply not Christian education.

Page 9 of 10

Rediscovering the Lost Doctrine of the Covenant

Session 5: A Covenantal Outlook Gregg Strawbridge 1. A Covenantal Outlook Places W orship at the Center of Life - W orship is to encompass all of life. But how so? W hile our faith in God and love for others is to be a "24/7" reality, certainly we don't do what we do in worship in our ordinary experience, Monday - through - Saturday. W e are not usually singing with others or corporately praying, or even listening to sermons. Most of us have a hard enough time tithing on Sunday, much less other days. It is true that our obedience to the Lord extends to all other activities, but most of the actions are quite different between Sunday morning and Monday morning. Covenantal Sacraments Extend to All of Life a. There is one very important connection between worshiping on the Lord's Day with His people and the rest of life. W e do many things in worship. W e praise. W e confess. W e profess. W e pray. W e listen. W e heed. W e give. W e may or may not do some form of these on other days. But one which we certainly do is that we eat and drink. The connection is so basic that we can overlook it. Many aspects of being equipped through the W ord and prayer prepare us to serve God in ordinary callings and in extraordinary opportunities. However, the simple life-sustaining actions of eating and drinking at the Table of Lord extend to our ordinary lives. God has given us ordinary bread and ordinary wine to confirm to us the infinite provision of Jesus. In gratitude, we eat and drink at the Lord's Table and every other day we give thanks, eating and drinking at all of the lesser tables of His Great Table. b. Jesus was truly man. He was not a spirit hologram. He came to redeem men, not ghosts. So Jesus has given the Table to earthly, fallen people who hunger and thirst for righteousness. For those who receive His bread and wine, there is a promise of the future consummation of the kingdom at the Lamb's High Feast. This future promise means that, like Jesus, we will gain resurrection. In the future consummation, we shall be more physical, not less physical. The promise of glory is not a gnostic, de-material glory, but a glorified new heavens and earth full of resurrected people. c. The Table has been called the Eucharist (from the Greek word for "giving thanks"). This is not a name Protestants should give over without a fight. Gratitude is the delicious fruit of redemption. Nothing changes our disposition like giving thanks with a grateful heart. W hen we give thanks we know that we have need of Another's help. W e receive Something outside ourselves as a gift. W hen we open our hands to receive, we must release what we are holding. Even so, coming to the Table of Gratitude reveals that we are undeserving of a seat at the King's banquet. W e do not deserve to be welcomed and yet we receive the invitation by grace. W e are seated at the King's Table, like lame Mephibosheth. "So Mephibosheth dwelt in Jerusalem, for he ate continually at the king's table. And he was lame in both his feet" (2 Sam. 9:13 - 10:1). The Kingdom Extends into Life a. This is clear in the covenant renewal approach to worship. The order of our worship follows the robustly Biblical pattern of Call, Confession, Communion, Consecration, and Commission. God calls us into His presence to worship; God charges us to corporately confess our sins; God comforts us with the declaration of our forgiveness through the gospel; God joins us with the Church triumphant in our confession of faith; God speaks to us through His W ord; God feeds us at His Table; God receives the fruit of our lives and labors in the offering; God blesses us in the benediction and sends us to out to serve in His victorious kingdom. b. Thus the kingdom extending to the rest of our life is evident in that 1) W e enter into the Divine presence from our ordinary dominion activities. 2) W e eat and drink from the creation in the midst of worship. 3) W hen we give we set apart the work of our hands for the kingdom and thereby have dominion. 4) W e are commissed to go forth from worship to go forth to love and serve Christ in His victorious kingdom.

2.

3.

Page 10 of 10