Steven Lawson’s series called A Long Line of Godly Men has made me awfully excited. I love Reformed theology and am thrilled to see the effort Lawson is expending in proving that this theology, seen as so new and so radical by such a large number of Christians, has been consistently taught by courageous and biblical Christians from the time of the writers of the Bible all the way to today. There truly is a long line of godly men testifying to God’s sovereignty in these doctrines of grace. And someday I look forward to having a long line of these books on my shelf.
While the main series will encompass five volumes each measuring several hundred pages, there will also be a subseries known as “Long Line of Godly Men Profiles.” These books will narrow in on some of the most important figures in church history, attempting to show how they held to these doctrines. It also wieghs and measures the impact of these individuals in one particular area. As I understand it, future volumes will cover Martin Luther, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon and other giants of the faith. Each volume will focus on a particular aspect of that person’s ministry and legacy. Preachers will be the key focus for, as Lawson says in his introduction, “I can think of no better discipline for preachers today, apart from the study of Scripture itself, than to examine the biblical exposition of spiritual giants from the past.” The first book in this series is The Expository Genius of John Calvin.
Affirming that to step into the pulpit is to enter onto holy ground, Lawson bemoans the fact that we live at a time when so many churches have compromised the sacred calling to preach. “Exposition is being replaced with entertainment, preaching with performances, doctrine with drama, and technology with theatrics. Desperately does the modern-day church need to recover its way and return to a pulpit that is Bible-based, Christ-centered, and life-changing.” The goal of the book is simply to allow others to see what a commitment to biblical preaching looks like in the life and ministry of a man who was sold out to this duty. For those who preach, this book ought to call you to a higher standard in handling the Word. If you are a supporter of one called to this ministry, the book will teach you how to pray for the one who teaches you.
The book begins, as we might expect, with a short biography of Calvin but quickly turns to his unsurpassed expository ability. Lawson discusses Calvin’s approach to the pulpit, his preparation, his introductions, his method of expounding the text, the way he crafted his delivery, his application of the truth and his concluding statements. In short, it examines each of the components that together formed his sermons. It focuses not only on function, but also on form.
The book is written in a way that is very logical, building around a consistent point-by-point framework as Lawson looks at 32 distinctives of Calvin’s preaching. And though the subject may appear to be dry, the book is easy to read and even enjoyable for a person like myself who does not preach. There is much we can all learn from the preaching ministry of John Calvin.
I agree with Lawson and so many others than expository preaching really is the need of the hour. The health of the church will begin with a healthy pulpit. A healthy pulpit is one from which the Word of God is faithfully and consistently preached. Those who wish to be better expositors of the Word should turn to the masters to learn how to improve their ability. John Calvin was one of these masters and one from whom all preachers can surely learn. Dr. Lawson’s brief book provides a fantastic introduction to Calvin’s ministry, not just in its impact but in its methodology. If this book portends what we can expect from this series (and this series within a series) it will be a landmark collection of books and I will eagerly anticipate the coming releases.
As it is published by Reformation Trust, I believe the book is currently available only through Ligonier’s site. You can buy it here.
Comments (23) »
1. Chris
March 18, 2007
11:14 AM
Before you start claiming that Steven Lawson is “Reformed” (he’s not Reformed; Calvinistic, perhaps, but not Reformed), you ought to read the following essay by Dr. Richard Muller on what it means to be Reformed:
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/how-many-points/
2. Jay
March 18, 2007
2:41 PM
Thank God some of us don’t get so caught up in labels and definitions to really care about whether or not brother Lawson is “Reformed with a capital R” and so on. ;P
3. Virgil Vaduva
March 18, 2007
3:14 PM
Good review, but I would have to get to book in order to know if his coverage of Calvin was twisted in any way. After all Calvin himself thought that God has in fact “revealed” to him many of the things written by him, which would prompt me to step back and say “whaaaa?”
4. Justin Childers
March 18, 2007
5:00 PM
This really is an excellent little book. It is must reading for all preachers and those who listen to preaching. Get a copy for yourself and your pastor. May God send a new reformation as pastors everywhere open The Book Sunday after Sunday.
5. Todd
March 18, 2007
11:59 PM
Virgil,
Could you please give us a direct quote from any of Calvin’s writings where he claims that?
6. SteveE
March 19, 2007
1:42 AM
Quote from Calvin….
“The responsibility of man, for sin, and the soverignty of God is not a subject that is revealed in the scriptures…”
Why? Because if man is responsible…he must have chosen to defy God. The only other conceiveable notion is that God created, and must, under Calvin’s theology, be the one making man sin.
He is either totally in control; doing all…or man has an aspect that Calvin refused to see. The fact that Calvin himself could not see this, says that he did not “want” to see it, because it defied his notion of scripture.
Reformed theology has never, satisfactorily answered this question, and denies scriptures that suggest anything else. It seeks to confound the issue with a myriad of other things, that ultimately leave the same questions, but the reformed individual satisfied that they are where “God wants them to be”.
7. Colin Adams
March 19, 2007
7:42 AM
Tim, thanks for the heads up on this. I share your enthusiasm! Even the title gets me excited (but maybe we’re a strange breed!).
8. Aaron S. Wilson
March 19, 2007
10:34 AM
My brother-in-law just gave me this book upon returning from his time at the Shepherd’s conf. Thanks for the recommendation, Tim, I’m looking forward to reading it. Maybe it’s small enough that I can actually finish it before starting another book! :o)
Steve E -
Would you mind giving the source of your Calvin quote (title, page #, etc.) , and/or perhaps the complete context of the quote. Thanks!
9. Jim Harrison
March 19, 2007
11:34 AM
If anyone is interested, Lawson has a series of audio messages available from his church’s website, www.cfbcmobile.org, which, I presume, are the basis of the 2nd volume of “Foundations…” which will deal with the Church Fathers. They’re pretty good, overall, though I do think he goes a little far in labeling the fathers “Doctrines of Grace men.” Yes, there are many statements made by the church fathers to which we would give hearty assent, but the same men also say things that we would find quite contradictory. Still, I think Lawson does a service by demonstrating that there is a line of “Grace” taught from the very beginning, and continuing on through the history of the church. It may have been clouded and muddled at times, and it may often have been a minority report, but grace wasn’t actually “rediscovered” by the reformation. It was never really lost.
10. Todd
March 19, 2007
12:05 PM
Steve E…
I would be shocked if that were an actual verbatim quote from Calvin. I could see Calvin saying that Scripture doesn’t explain how we reconcile the 2 (man’s responsibility and God’s sovereignty), but I don’t see him saying that man’s responsibility and God’s sovereignty are not revealed in Scripture.
Please provide us with a page number for this quote.
Also, how does Arminianism reconcile man’s responsiblity and God’s sovereignty?
11. Jeff de Ruyter
March 19, 2007
12:37 PM
Just ordered it, thank you for the heads up!
12. Ken Abbott
March 19, 2007
1:29 PM
SteveE: I join the others in asking for you to provide a citation for the Calvin “quote” (which, interestingly, you have rendered differently when you have posted on this subject in other threads on this blog).
This may be your particular hobby horse, but you have a responsibility to quote accurately and verifiably.
13. Jon
March 19, 2007
3:28 PM
Definitely one for my ‘new book’ wish list. After reading ‘Barth for armchair theologians’ it will be good to heart warming truth that I can understand!
Jon
14. Virgil Vaduva
March 19, 2007
7:23 PM
Todd I am much obliged:
“I have from God what I teach, and herein my conscience fortifies me.”
“Dieu m’a fait la grace de declarer ce qu’est bon et mauvais” -(God has been gracious enough to reveal unto me good and evil)
Both quotes are well documented and referenced in Chapter Two of Stefan Zweig’s book The Right to Heresy. You can also read my article by the same title here:
http://planetpreterist.com/…
Calvin was not a genius my friend…he was a tyrant and a murderer.
15. CJD
March 19, 2007
7:38 PM
Just a quick note: this book is not the first in this series. That would be Foundations of Grace. I’m not exactly sure where Expository Genius fits into this series. It’s not advertised as one in this five-part series, even though “A long line of godly men” is printed on its cover. ?? I dunno.
16. David Pearson
March 20, 2007
9:10 AM
Virgil,
That’s fascinating that you would call Calvin a tyrant and a murderer, all based on the writings of Stefan Zweig.
Here’s an interesting little tidbit about Mr. Zweig:
“Erasmus, the famous Duch humanist, Zweig considered his spirirual ancestor (“the most eloquent advocate of the humanist ideal of friendship towards the world and the spirit”), and portrayed him in TRIUMPH UND TRAGIK DES ERASMUS ROTTERDAM (1934, Erasmus of Rotterdam). Luther represented the opposite of Erasmus, “the revolutionary; driven by the demonic energies lurking in the German people”. With his views about Germany’s “national spirit” Zweig was not alone - the book was published a few years after the Nazis had seized power.”
Also, Zweig was a fan of the writings of NIETZSCHE. Do I really need to say more? And yet some would place greater emphasis on a man like Zweig, and his hate-filled rant against Calvin than other more credible biographies. Like I said - fascinating….
17. Tim Challies
March 20, 2007
9:49 AM
“Calvin was not a genius my friend…he was a tyrant and a murderer.”
Please do yourself a favor and take an objective look at Calvin to see if this is really true. Certainly this is his reputation in “the world” but do take the time to read and see if this is really true.
“this book is not the first in this series.”
This is the first in the sub-series or series-within-a-series.
18. David Pearson
March 20, 2007
9:58 AM
…by the way…while Calvin did write the heresy charges against Servetus, he was not on the Geneva council that carried the sentence out. He did not run Geneva. This is not to say I think his actions were correct in this matter - but I marvel that folks who seem to hold such animus towards Calvin in this one matter never seem to express as much disgust for the many killed under the banner of the Catholic church - which also would have put Servetus to death for his beliefs. Again - not to say his actions were correct, but execution for heresy was the mindset of that age.
19. Tim Challies
March 20, 2007
10:01 AM
“Again - not to say his actions were correct, but execution for heresy was the mindset of that age.”
That’s about it.
I’ve written about that here.
20. Jim Harrison
March 20, 2007
12:55 PM
Virgil,
You have been asked to provide a reference from Calvin’s writings for the quote which you have presented as his. Thus far, you have not done so. A reference to Stefan Zweig is not a reference to an original source which anyone can check and confirm.
So I’ll ask again, please provide the original source, that is, the reference from Calvin’s writings, in which he makes the statement that you claim him to have made. Since you refer us to Zweig, I assume you have that book and can easily provide Zweig’s reference for the statement.
If you cannot, then frankly, you have no credibility here.
21. Jim Harrison
March 20, 2007
1:01 PM
Virgil, you provided the following, in answer to the request for documentation that Calvin claimed some kind of extra-biblical revelation:
“I have from God what I teach, and herein my conscience fortifies me.”
“Dieu m’a fait la grace de declarer ce qu’est bon et mauvais” -(God has been gracious enough to reveal unto me good and evil)”
I will note again that no documentation is provided, but beyond that, surely you realize that anyone who believes that God has revealed Himself in His written revelation could say the same thing. I am a pastor. I have from God what I teach, provided in the Bible. And God has indeed been gracious to reveal good and evil to me, also in His word.
So unless you can provide documentation that Calvin said what you claim, and that he was specifically speaking of revelation outside the written word, you have proved nothing.
22. Ken Abbott
March 20, 2007
5:19 PM
Jim Harrison has spoken well, twice. ;)
I, too, call for provision of a citation from a primary source, so that the quote can be verified and examined in context. Too many times an isolated sentence has been selectively quoted to make a particular point, but when the sentence is read in its context an entirely different (or at least a more accurate) meaning becomes apparent.
C’mon, Virgil. Would you like to be remembered to posterity solely by your critics and detractors?
23. SteveE
March 20, 2007
7:02 PM
Todd,
You’ll have to fogive the paraphrase of Calvin’s statement. I will, however, endeavor to go back and find the passage in his institutes that alludes to this. You are correct, by the way, in saying that he meant “how the two are reconciled.” Calvin’s statement, as I remember was more of a rather confusing, non-statement. Basically, he was trying to reconcile God being totally in charge of everything, yet impossibly, still having us responsible for sins we were unable to prevent by arbitrary decision from on high. For our inability would necessarily have been created “in” us. It could not be otherwise, for God is either totally doing all, or some other factor operates.
As for Armininism, I suppose I could quote some cliche thing that you’ve heard a million times, and agree with no more than I. Of course, this method would leave God virtually the opposite of what Calvin suggested, and place Him in the realm of catering to us.
I find that when there are two direct opposites, then the truth must be some where in between.
For all of you, please forgive the “boiling down” of one of Calvin’s long institute teaching. As I said, I will search it out again and try and make sure that I give chapter and verse in the future.