Isaiah 55:9 - What does it Mean?

Recently, a visitor to this blog asked about the theme verse displayed in the blog header:

Isaiah 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.

The questioner specifically asked what I think this verse means.

Disclaimer and Clarification

Before answering this question, I should note that it matters very little what I think this verse means. God's Word is, at the most basic level, a communication of what He thinks. The verse does, after all, address the subject of His "thoughts." The meaning given by the Holy Spirit to Isaiah 55:9 is much more significant, and vastly more important, than anything I think. And, as He, the Spirit of Revelation, has given us the mind of Christ, we can know with a great degree of certainty what the verse actually, and objectively, signifies.

Too often, theological reflection has been downgraded to the level of opinion and conjecture. The speculations of favored theologians and scholars are discussed, and then someone's feelings about their mesmerizing extra-Biblical theories are recorded with grand intellectual flourishes. This futile endeavor leaves us wise in our own eyes and pathetically self-satisfied. However, when we approach the sacred text of the Bible, we are not dealing with human philosophy. We are not working with a man-made construction. We are considering the word of the prophets "more fully confirmed," to which we will do well to "pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place . . . knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." (II Peter 1:19-21, ESV). This is the WORD OF GOD, and it renders our worldly and man-centered thinking totally bankrupt. It reveals our depravity, shatters our self-conceit, demolishes our pride. It is God's MESSAGE, hidden from the wise and lofty, and powerfully manifested to the simple-hearted -- for those with ears to hear.

So, I'd like to begin by redirecting the question. Rather than discussing what I think this verse means, I will instead attempt to answer, at least in part (yet accurately), the following questions:

• What meaning has the Holy Spirit poured into Isaiah 55:9? 
• What meaning will He help us to draw out by careful study?

May God guide us in the study of His Truth.

Contexts and Outline

Now that we have begun to think of the verse in its wide context as a part of the inerrant and infallible, God-breathed text of Scripture, we may begin to narrow in further and view it in a variety of additional contexts:

• Bible Context: Old Testament - the verse appears several hundred years prior to the birth of the incarnate Christ, the establishment of the New Covenant and the inception of the Church.
• Genre Context: Prophecy - the verse is the utterance of a prophet, speaking for God in the "first person" voice. It fulfills a dual prophetic role of calling God's covenant people to repentance and foretelling the glories of God's future Kingdom.
• Book/Historical Context: Isaiah - the verse appears within the prophecies of Isaiah, the son of Amoz, who prophesied over a period exceeding 50 years, during which Israel was characterized by corruption, apostasy and political turmoil. In Isaiah's lifetime, the Northern Kingdom was destroyed, and he saw multiple threats rise against the Southern kingdom of Judah while dwelling in its capital city of Jerusalem. 
• Book Section Context: Isaiah 40-66 - the verse appears in a section characterized by prophecies of hope and restoration.
• Chapter Context: Isaiah 55 - the verse appears in the center of a chapter which may be outlined as follows:

1. Call to Draw Near to God (55:1-3)
• Invitation to the Thirsty
• Invitation to the Impoverished
• Contrast of False and True Satisfaction
• A New Covenant Promised
• Made by God
• Faithfulness and Mercy
• Everlasting
2. Declaration of Israel's Role (55:4-5)
• As Witness
• As Leader and Commander
• As Caller 
• As God's Glorified People
• Target Audience: The Gentiles! (The "People" and "a Nation" not known)
3. Instructions for Those Seeking God (55:6-7)
• Seek the LORD
• Call on Him
• Forsake your own Ways and Thoughts
• Return to the LORD
• Results: Compassion and Abundant Pardon
4. Description of God's Thoughts and Ways (55:8-9)
• Not Your Thoughts
• Not Your Ways
• Higher than Your Thoughts and Ways
• As the Heavens are Above the Earth
5. Illustration of God's Thoughts and Ways (55:10-11)
• God's Word is Given as Rain and Snow from Heaven
• God's Word Infallibly Produces its Intended Effect on the Earth
• Water
• Sprout
• Seed
• Bread
6. Promise of Israel's Future Hope (55:12-13)
• Joy
• Peace
• Nature Celebrating
• A Name for the Lord
• An Everlasting Sign

Summary of the Passage

We may conclude, from the above discussion of contexts and the outline of the passage, that the broad theme of the chapter is Israel's restoration and the call of the Gentiles. The passage makes clear that Israel is to be used as God's witness so that the Gentiles may partake in the blessings of David, the New Covenant of God's mercy and truth, the compassion and the forgiveness of God.

This divine purpose, though mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament, would have been foreign to the thinking of most ancient Hebrews. In fact, it was even shocking to the early New Testament church, as demonstrated by Peter's initial hesitation and later surprise when preaching to the household of Cornelius, in seeing the Spirit poured out on the Gentiles. Paul's unique, unexpected, and God-initiated mission to preach the Gospel of grace to the nations also illustrates this chapter's message with some clarity.

The consistent theme in the passage is this: God calls sinners to Himself and will receive them with overflowing mercy, whether they are ethnically Jewish or Gentile.

The Lord forthrightly explains the reason that underlies this astonishing mercy: His thoughts and His ways, which are categorically opposite to ours, and radically exalted above ours, tend toward displays of extravagant mercy.

Exegetical Considerations

When God speaks of His "thoughts" in this passage, He uses the Hebrew term machashabah, which refers to counsel, plan or purpose (sometimes carrying the connotation of "invention"). When He speaks of His "ways," He uses the Hebrew word derek, which is a path or a road (figuratively, a course of life or one's moral character -- what we might call a "lifestyle" or a "walk of life" in today's vernacular). God is therefore describing something much deeper and more significant than a mere passing thought or intellectual pursuit. He is describing His very WILL, and His PERSONAL HABITS. And when He speaks of these things, thus revealing HIMSELF, He declares vehemently that His ways are not ours! In doing so, He uses the absolute negation (Heb. lo). Additionally, in verses 8 and 9, the repetition of the words "thoughts" (4 times) and "ways" (4 times) emphatically magnifies the message: "I am not like you! I am different! I am infinitely higher!" And yet, by forsaking his own ways and thoughts, and seeking after the Lord, even the unrighteous person (in point of fact, only the unrighteous person) can discover and enjoy these higher ways and thoughts.

The Meaning of Isaiah 55:9

The ancient Hebrew mind could perhaps think of no greater distance and no greater difference than that existing between heaven and earth. In this verse, the prophet shows us that God in His wise and holy counsels is far above us. His eternal plans do not originate within our familiar sphere, but enter it from without and from above. They are beyond our reach. They transcend us! His actions, characteristics, counsels and purposes are thus apt to surprise us when they break through. Yet they are ultimately intended to nourish us, to initiate growth, to produce fruitfulness in us, and to feed others. That is what mercy does. When the revelation of His ways is received within, it satisfies our need and give us life. It furnishes peace and instills joy. It gives us something to give.

Isaiah 55:9 teaches us that God's thinking is incomparable and incomprehensible, yet penetrating and available. It shows us the fine balance of a mysterious, and yet perspicuous, Word from our gracious Creator -- a Word sent to restore His fallen creation by the strange working of an unearthly power. And that power is called mercy.

May you, dear reader, be flooded with His grace today!

Sinners and the Savior - Encouragements and Exhortations

A healthy Christian is never far from the knowledge that he is a sinner. We often pass through the trials, struggles and frustrations of Romans 7. This is normal. The more closely we walk with the Lord, and the longer we live under the light of His Word, the more our sin will be exposed. However, if we are going to progress in sanctification we need to continuously apply and re-apply the principles of Romans 6 and the promises of Romans 8.


We must never allow our own sinfulness to become the focus of our faith. That is a sure path to trouble. Instead, we must focus intently on Christ as Savior - particularly in relation to these questions:

• How Christ saves
• Why Christ saves
• When Christ saves
• Where Christ saves
• Whom Christ saves
• What Christ saves us from
• What Christ saves us to
• What Christ saves us for

Focus on these things. Consider each one in detail. The questions appear simple, but the answers are gloriously complex (and totally encouraging). Explore them. Chew on them. Revel in them. Each will lead you to the Gospel as the power of God for all who believe!

Nouthetic Counseling and Discipleship Training

Brad Bigney shares a Biblical
Perspective on Worry and Fear

This weekend my pastor and I attended the third installment of NANC Counseling and Discipleship Training at Christian Family Chapel in Jacksonville, FL. Over three weekends, we received an introduction to the basics and fundamentals, and we hope to pursue more education in this area in the future. My former pastor, Brad Bigney, was one of the featured speakers. It has been wonderful to sit again before this man whom God used at a critical time in my life. Soon after I first met Brad back in 2000, my marriage fell apart and my wife and I were separated for two and a half years. We are walking miracles, now committed to our family and working hard to raise up our children in the ways of the Lord! We have received such mercy at the hands of our God, who not only forgave and accepted us, but also lives in us and transforms us by His Word. As I sat next to my current pastor, Craig Bowen, it struck me how perfectly God has provided for the care of my family under faithful servants of Christ.

The 30 hour NANC training course was amazing. Some of the other featured speakers were:

Randy Patten - Executive Director of NANC. He is a solid, hard-hitting preacher and teacher with vast counseling experience and lots of insightful lessons to share.
Stuart Scott - Associate Professor of Biblical Counseling at SBTS and Department Coordinator of Biblical Counseling at Boyce College. Dr. Scott served 10 years under John MacArthur at Grace Community Church. He is a pioneer in the art of Biblical Counseling and a man of great discernment.
Jim Newheiser - Pastor of Grace Bible Church of North San Diego County, CA and head of the Institute for Biblical Counseling and Discipleship. He is a wise, balanced thinker.
Nicolas Ellen - Pastor of Community of Faith Bible Church in Houston, TX. He is a great speaker with energy and passion for the Truth!
Dan Gannon, MD and Pam Gannon, RN - This husband/wife team includes an orthopedic surgeon and a registered nurse who share valuable insights regarding medical issues in counseling. They are thorough and extremely helpful in their analysis of challenging topics.
Andrew Rogers - Pastor of Sunrise Community Church in Atlantic Beach, FL. He is a solid preacher and teacher with a gift for exposition and application.

A key concept shared by several of the speakers is the fact that humanity's problems revolve around two primary issues: sin and suffering. All suffering is a result of the fall, but not all suffering is the direct result of one's own sin. Often a counselor must confront sin, but sometimes he is simply called to offer comfort to an afflicted soul. The counselor is a fellow sinner and a fellow sufferer who desires to share God's grace. The goal is always to help the counselee to grow to become more like Christ, pleasing and glorifying God through the situation. NANC's overall perspective included a great deal of humility and nuance, while holding resolutely to the sufficiency of Scripture. Integrationist methods that attempt to reconcile secular psychology with Biblical theology were briefly critiqued, but the main focus was on the power and efficacy of the Word of God itself.

I have met a few people who have gotten a poor impression of nouthetic counseling. My suggestion would be to attend a NANC training course before believing any negative reports about what is taught. The things you actually hear might surprise you!

In conclusion, I highly recommend this training for any Christian who is interested in helping others and making disciples.

God's PRO-MANDS

Command + Promise = PRO-MAND

Here's an example: "Draw near to God, and He will draw near to you." (James 4:8a)

Do you see how the command and the promise go together as a set? For a believing child of God, the promise provides motivation to obey the command.

Here's another way to find a PRO-MAND: someone has said that under the New Covenant the 10 Commandments become 10 Promises. "You shall have no other gods before me . . ." What wonderful news this is when taken as a promise. It's a marvelous PRO-MAND!

Please take a moment to share more encouraging "PRO-MANDS" in the comments.

Calvin on the Sufficiency of Scripture

"But let us know, as faith can be grounded nowhere else than in the Word of the Lord, so we must only stand to the testimony thereof in all controversies."

-from Calvin's Commentary on Acts 17:2

John Frame on the Inerrancy of Scripture

Here's an excerpt from Frame's article on inerrancy, written in 2002:

This is not a mere "modern" position. As we have seen, it is the position of Scripture itself. Augustine in the fifth century declared, "None of these (scriptural) authors has erred in any respect of writing." Infallibility⁴ is affirmed in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1 and in the Belgic Confession, Article 7.

Shall we speak today of biblical "inerrancy?" The term does, to be sure, produce confusion in some circles. Some theologians have gone far astray from the dictionary meaning of "inerrant." James Orr, for example, defined "inerrant" as "hard and fast literality in minute matters of historical, geographical, and scientific detail."⁵ Well, if "inerrancy" requires literalism, then we should renounce inerrancy; for the Bible is not always to be interpreted literally. Certainly there are important questions of Bible interpretation that one bypasses if he accepts biblical inerrancy in this sense.

But we should remember that Orr's use of the term, and the similar uses of contemporary theologians, are distortions of its meaning. Perhaps those distortions have become so frequent today as to inhibit the usefulness of the term. For the time being, however, I would like to keep the term, and explain to people who question me that I am not using it in Orr's sense, but rather to confess the historic faith of the church.

We do have a problem here: Other things being equal, I would prefer to drop all extra-scriptural terms including "infallible" and "inerrant" and simply speak, as Scripture does, of God's Word being true. That's all we mean, after all, when we say Scripture is inerrant. But modern theologians won't let me do that. They redefine "truth" so that it refers to some big theological notion⁶ , and they will not permit me to use it as meaning "correctness" or "accuracy" or "reliability." So I try the word "infallible," a historical expression that, as I indicated in a footnote above, is actually a stronger term than "inerrancy." But again, modern theologians⁷ insist on redefining that word also, so that it actually says less than "inerrancy."

Now what is our alternative? Even "accuracy" and "reliability" have been distorted by theological pre-emption. "Correctness" seems too trivial to express what we want to say. So, although the term is overly technical and subject to some misunderstanding, I intend to keep the word "inerrant" as a description of God's Word, and I hope that my readers will do the same. The idea, of course, is more important than the word. If I can find better language that expresses the biblical doctrine to modern hearers, I will be happy to use that and drop "inerrancy." But at this moment, "inerrancy" has no adequate replacement. To drop the term in the present situation, then, can involve compromising the doctrine, and that we dare not do. God will not accept or tolerate negative human judgments concerning his holy Word. So I conclude: yes, the Bible is inerrant.

It is interesting to note Frame's frustration over the many distortions of the term, resulting from over-literal views (such as that of James Orr) on the one hand, and from minimizations of the of term's meaning on the other. The Chicago Statement seems to strike the right balance, and I am surprised Frame doesn't mention it. However, I concur with Frame's desire to affirm the Truth of Scripture as presented by Scripture.

Meet Dr. Joel Klenck, Paleontologist

Here are two short videos of Dr. Joel Klenck speaking at my church. The rock background is perfect for the subject matter, don't you think?

Learn more about Dr. Klenck's work here: Paleontological Research Corporation

Evolution - the Seeds of Doubt

Some Comments About Creation and Inerrancy

Don't Be Duped By Evolutionists, or "The Slippery Slide Into Devolving Theological Liberalism"

For atheists and agnostics, evolution is a no brainer. They don't have the Book - the authoritative self-revelation of the Creator - to guide their thinking. The only viable choice for God-rejectors is to look backward and guess what might have happened in the prehistoric past. Dig up some rocks and try to piece it all together with limited intellect and and a tiny little slice of empirical evidence. Their driving positive presupposition is that they can figure it out, and their driving negative presupposition is that the Biblical account can't possibly be true and isn't even worth considering. They write it off as mere superstition.

It is odd to see Christians follow in lock step with the results of such godless thinking. It's shocking, in fact, to consider how many well-meaning believers are now accepting evolution as an unquestionable fact. We have the official story on cosmic and human origins. We have the Creator's Own Word on the matter. He includes specific details of His own actions in the God-breathed account of Genesis. There is no good reason to doubt His account, from a scientific standpoint or a Biblical one.

The Inerrant Bible: An Alternative to Evolutionary Assumptions

Every day for the past week, I have attended 2-3 hours of scholarly lectures given by Dr. Joel D. Klenk, a scientist from the Paleontological Research Corporation. Klenck, who holds an earned Ph.D from Harvard, teaches extensively on the scientific study of Biblical creation. His material is as deep in the study of Hebrew language and Biblical texts as it is in the study of rock layers, fossils and archeological evidence. He demonstrates how and why the Biblical texts, taken as actual fact, do not conflict with ANY scientific evidence. With insights derived from a career in the field and extensive firsthand study, he exposes multiple and specific instances in which contradictory evidence has been ignored by his evolutionary-minded colleagues. But Klenck is not just another player on the creationist bandwagon. He fearlessly takes fellow creationists to task when any aspect of their approach is either unbiblical or unscientific.

You can learn more about the Paleontological Research Corporation and Dr. Klenck's work by clicking here. (Incidentally, the video introduction/sales pitch was filmed at my church).

If there were actual conflicts between real science and the creation account, I could understand some Christians being tempted to seek an alternative. If evolution made logical and scientific sense, I could understand. But for any believer to deny a creation account that perfectly accords with all of the scientific evidence, and to replace it with something as rickety as evolution theory, is beyond comprehension. Recently, I made the following remark to a Christian evolutionist: even if I were to reject Biblical creation, I could not put evolution in its place because evolution is not scientifically tenable. It's a dead theory, from start to finish. On the other hand, at least theistic evolutionists can claim God made the impossible happen by miraculously intervening - but then why not just say God miraculously created the world in six days as He claims?

Despite the salient problems with their fairy tale, evolutionists throughout the world continue to prop up their theory and present it as factually true. The sheer force of their insistence should cause all thinking people to suspect something is amiss. The pure stubbornness with which they cling to it ought to give us a clue. They leave the impression that only a backwards, intellectually impaired buffoon would ever question their adorable theory. It's all somewhat reminiscent of a cat, which, when cornered, puffs itself up to look big and scary. All that raised fur, the hiss, and those flashing eyes can get you thinking you're in real danger. But in reality you're only facing a terrified little ball of fur. An evolutionist looking at the evidence is rather like a cat stuck up in a tree. He thinks he has the high, safe position, but in reality he was chased up there. Try to get him down, and you'll feel those claws.

Like cornered cats, atheistic evolutionists are scared to death by the obvious drift of the evidence. They're terrified by what the evidence suggests: that we were created by a morally superior God and are accountable to Him in every way. They quell these fears by getting the rest of us to validate and affirm their view (something the evidence can never do). They are more zealous in evangelizing for their secular cause than most Christians are for the cause of the Gospel. In the end, it's all bald conjecture and a denial of the blindingly clear Truth. Christian, don't be fooled!

Continued Here: The Devolution of Theology

For further study, see this excellent article by James Anderson:

"I Love Jesus and I Accept Evolution"

Has the Doctrine of Inerrancy Outlived Its Usefulness?

Inerrancy simply means that the Bible, in its original manuscripts, is entirely true and free from any kind of error. In more colloquial language, it is the belief that the Bible is totally trustworthy because it is totally true. Corresponding to this is the belief that God has preserved the Word He carefully spoke through the prophets, so that the extant Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts are substantially free from error. At the very least, this means we can discern when and where a scribal error or emendation may have taken place, and there is ultimately no essential detail that is misleading or inaccurate after study. Some details may be unclear, but none are inaccurate. The reliability of the Bible is a core doctrine of orthodox Christian theology.

In a recent post on the blog "Near Emmaus," Robert Jiminez wonders aloud whether this term retains any usefulness in today's world. He begins this way:

"Through out most of my Christian life I had embraced verbal inerrancy, however in the last several years I have been reevaluating some of my positions that I have held. Although I had embraced this position it never really sat well with me. Inerrancy for all it’s good intentions is a term that in my opinion has outlived it’s usefulness in the advancement of promoting the authority of the Bible, and it’s trustworthiness. It is a position that is difficult to defend, and further problematic because of the various definitions attributed to it."

One might observe that these sentiments don't seem very near to Emmaus at all. Wouldn't our Lord's exposition to the two disciples on the Emmaus Road result in an increased faith in the reliability of the Law and the Prophets? It is strange that a writer at a site named for the exposition of Scripture by God Himself would object to the doctrine of inerrancy. Here are Jimenez's objections, summarized:

1. Inerrancy never sat well with me

2. Inerrancy is difficult to defend

3. Inerrancy is problematic because it is defined several different ways

I believe these are the weakest possible, and the most extremely errant, reasons for rejecting a doctrine. They suggest that personal bias and preference, along with a quest for relevance and simplicity of presentation, are of greater value than adherence to orthodox faith.

So far, Jiminez has only offered the first installment in a promised muli-part series. We will follow his arguments and respond point by point. In the remainder of this post, we will examine two other Christian doctrines and pretend to "defeat" them by applying the same logic Jimenez applies to the doctrine of inerrancy. Thus, we will face a clear choice:

1. Retain inerrancy and all other Biblically warranted orthodox doctrines, or

2. Reject inerrancy and all other Biblically warranted orthodox doctrines.

Besides this, I will argue that all orthodox doctrines are properly built upon inerrancy, so an attack on inerrancy undermines the entire Biblical faith of Christianity. One attacks this doctrine only at the risk of sliding into heresy, because inerrancy provides the definitive guide to Christian belief. Without it, we cannot declare anything true or false on Biblical grounds. Down the road, I might invoke J. Gresham Machen as a witness against creeping liberalism. But we'll wait and see where Jimenez's next shot is aimed, and respond accordingly.

For now, let's take a look at the Biblical doctrines of "Faith" and "Holiness," and ask the question: "Have they outlived their usefulness?"

The "Sit Well" Test.

The doctrines of Faith and Holiness have never sat well with me. They generally don't present themselves as agreeable to human nature, and in fact are rejected by the majority of human beings for this very reason. Faith calls me to abandon my independence and self-reliance, choosing rather to place my full trust in a mysterious, invisible Being who claims absolute sovereignty over everything that exists (including me). It definitely doesn't sit well, but love for Christ leads us to accept and even appreciate this doctrine. I wonder if our resistance to it "sits well" with God?

Holiness calls me to recognize my deeply corrupt impurity and my responsibility to be changed or destroyed. It demands that I esteem God so highly as to recognize that no creature can stand before His infinitely grand, perfect Otherness. So, although God loves and accepts me just as I am, He won't and can't leave me this way. He commits Himself by covenant to change me. This definitely doesn't sit well, but one cannot even start to believe the Gospel without understanding at least the core components of this doctrine.

The "Difficult to Defend" Test

How does one begin to defend Faith and Holiness? The only conceivable way is to find them in Scripture. But if we don't have an inerrant Bible, what difference does it make? How do we know the applicable Biblical passages are not somehow erroneous? Without Scripture, how could I ever defend the proposition that human beings must trust God? How would I defend the proposition that God is holy and demands holiness from us? Where would I even start?

The "Too Many Definitions" Test

If any random heretic can topple an orthodox doctrine simply by creating alternate definitions for the same words, the battle was lost before it began. Yet Jimenez states the argument directly,

"This is one of the major problems with this position, too many definitions."

That's a major problem? If it really is a major problem, there can never be any measurable orthodoxy at all, only a meandering stream of new temporary terms to describe concepts that are no longer meaningful. Why not rather clarify the meaning using a Biblical standard? Whatever the reasons given, rejecting the doctrine only demonstrates that one has already rejected the doctrine! Jimenez has fallen into the classic semantic snare of postmodernism.

How many erroneous definitions of Faith might one identify in the modern Evangelical world (let alone the wider Christian community)? Some believe faith is a denial of reality, some believe it is a creative substance used for our own profit, some believe it is little more than baptism or church attendance. Shall we stop believing in REAL Faith? Holiness, too, has been twisted. It is reduced to a subjective feeling or rendered as a mere list of rules to keep. There are more false varieties of holiness in the world today than there are species of trees! Does this somehow make true Holiness an invalid doctrine? Apply the "Too Many Definitions" test to the Person of Jesus Christ, and see how many variations you can find! Applying such a test to any doctrine is absurd, and only proves a presuppositional bias against the doctrine. So many straws to grasp, and only two hands with which to grasp them! It's a textbook case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Is it possible that a doctrine becomes corrupted and shredded into many different false variations precisely because it does not sit well with human beings, and precisely because is difficult to defend from man-centered premises - yet it is nonetheless true? Do we not find ourselves constantly fighting the temptation to soften Biblical doctrines in the face of our ungodly culture? No wonder true doctrines morph into so many falsified clones of themselves at the hands of the self-appointed "doctors" of the church!

We see that Jimenez's complaints about inerrancy might just as well be applied to "Faith" and "Holiness." I call upon Jimenez to reject all three, or retain all three, but not to attempt to saw off the branch on which his own faith and holiness are built. But one might ask: is inerrancy as Biblically warranted as "Faith" and "Holiness" are? To answer that, let us go with faith in the holiness of our God, to the primary epistemic Source for every Christian: the inerrant Bible. I care little about the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (CSBI), or the opinions of Norman L. Geisler, good as they probably are. It is the Bible Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (BSBI) that matters most.

II Timothy 2:15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

It is the Word of Truth, not the word of half-truths or errors. If it is not inerrant, the only right handling would be to identify and remove the errors. Therefore, let all non-inerrantists demonstrate how to authoritatively separate the purported fictions from the facts of Scripture! (Cf. Psalm 119:43, Ephesians 1:13, James 1:18)

II Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

God does not breathe out lies. God does not need us to give Him a breath mint. God breathes inerrant Truth, and it is sweet.

Psalm 19:7-12

The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul.

The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy, making wise the simple.

The precepts of the LORD are right, giving joy to the heart.

The commands of the LORD are radiant, giving light to the eyes.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever.

The ordinances of the LORD are sure and altogether righteous.

They are more precious than gold, than much pure gold;

they are sweeter than honey, than honey from the comb.

By them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.

Who can discern his errors? Forgive my hidden faults.

After extolling the virtues of God's Word, David considers his own faults, but not any error supposedly found in Scripture. Scripture is seen as the remedy for human errors, not the result of them.

Isaiah 8:19-22 When men tell you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living? To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn. Distressed and hungry, they will roam through the land; when they are famished, they will become enraged and, looking upward, will curse their king and their God. Then they will look toward the earth and see only distress and darkness and fearful gloom, and they will be thrust into utter darkness.

We inquire of God in His Word. It is not dead, but alive, and it is the standard by which all else is judged. Whatever contradicts it does not have the faintest light. Those who oppose it are doomed to destruction. God defends and guarantees the inerrancy of His own Word.

For now, this is enough. Much more Scripture could be cited in its own defense, but I'll save it for future installments.

As a final postscript, we may note with an obviousness that ought to be unnecessary, that no true doctrine can possibly "outlive its usefulness." If a doctrine is true, it isn't new. And if it's new, it isn't true. God's Word is eternal and all of it is profitable (i.e. useful, II Timothy 3:16). May He be forever praised!

The Servant Who Suffered to Save Sinners - Introduction

It's always interesting to speak abstractly and philosophically about Calvinism and theology. That's something I've done extensively of late. But I sense a need to get my focus back on the simple truth of the Gospel through a study of the Word in a more devotional/exegetical manner.

Even the best theological systems and philosophies cannot feed the soul. For that purpose, God has given us His Living Word and His Precious Spirit. This is why some of God's dear children can be theologically off the mark, but are still full of the life and love of God. Strange as it may seem, some who are steeped in egregious philosophical errors that are obviously unbiblical have nonetheless fed on the Word and received abundant grace from it. They walk in the Spirit, and love God with all their hearts. His Word is powerful and often works secretly within us, even when we miss the point (philosophically speaking). This is also why some of those who seem to be most theologically right can be dry wells, with little love or joy to offer. They've abandoned their pure devotion to the Word and run after every obscure question for which their heart craves an answer. It's the idolatry of philosophy, which can even exist in theologically grounded philosophy. It's easy to treat the Bible like an encyclopedia for reference and information gathering. Yet God gave His Word to us as an endless fountain of water, and daily bread to our souls - rich, refreshing, nutritious, and life-sustaining. It's not that deeper theological pondering is bad (it's not), but it has to be kept in balance. We don't want to have our "head in the clouds" (at least not all the time).

With that in mind, this post begins a new series called "The Servant Who Suffered to Save Sinners." Several years ago (at a time when, by God's grace, I began to grieve over a perceived hardening of my heart), I sensed a stirring from the Lord to pursue a study of Christ's work on the cross. It was as if He said, "Look to the cross, for in seeing My brokenness you will be broken again." For weeks thereafter, I meditated upon the words of Isaiah 53. The fruit of those meditations continues to feed Gospel truth to my soul to this day. Now, dear friend, I pray that these studies will feed your soul as we look to the cross together.

Isaiah 53 is a remarkable passage of Scripture for many reasons. Here are a few of them.

1. It was written more than 700 years prior to the birth of Christ, and yet it predicts His sufferings with undeniable accuracy.

2. It serves as a key link between the Old and New Testaments, being one of the clearest Old Testament passages which unambiguously states doctrines related to the Gospel. Thus, it demonstrates the unity of the Bible's message.

3. It sets forth divine sovereignty and human responsibility; describes key facets of the incarnation; affirms the total depravity and universal guilt of mankind; offers some explanation of human suffering; shows the humility, obedience and sinless innocence of Christ; reveals Christ's ministry as a sin-bearing sacrifice; implies substitutionary atonement; promises lost sinners a way of reconciliation with God; predicts Christ's suffering, death, burial, resurrection and glorification; and it unveils the justification of sinners through faith in God's Own righteousness.

We'll explore these things more deeply as we examine the text theme by theme, concept by concept, line by line, phrase by phrase, and word by word. Join me as we fix our gaze lovingly on the Lord Jesus Christ . . .

THE SERVANT WHO SUFFERED TO SAVE SINNERS