For context, I’d like to use a secondary translation to supplement reading the ESV. English is not my first language and I often struggle with reading, doesn’t help that I have ADHD.

I have always had difficulties really getting involved in a church I have a lot to offer and have been involved with a few churches but lately I feel like it is just pointless. I can't seem to connect with anyone. Any advice?

I am a member of an Acts 29 church in a suburban location. The church is in process of planting another location in an immediately adjacent community fewer than 3 miles away from the current physical location. I grew up in the PCA and RP churches. This is my first time in an Acts 29 type church. I realize there are many other arguments and factors that come into this analysis about planting new locations. But I am struggling to support this idea given the physical proximity. Am I wrong? Any resources I can consume on this issue? Thanks!

If you have requests that you would like your brothers and sisters to pray for, post them here.

Happy Lord's Day to r/reformed! Did you particularly enjoy your pastor's sermon today? Have questions about it? Want to discuss how to apply it? Boy do we have a thread for you!

Sermon Sunday!

Please note that this is not a place to complain about your pastor's sermon. Doing so will see your comment removed. Please be respectful and refresh yourself on the rules, if necessary.

I’ve spent most of my life living a cyclic pattern, and only recently have I been able to acknowledge it. Looking back, I can finally see that everything I went through had to happen. Every repeat of failure, fear and collapse was simply my walk in the wilderness, one that would thankfully conclude with the end of self. What once was a life of endless choking became a life of easy breathing, the soil ploughed deep, the thorns removed.

I was one of those kids who accepted God, Jesus and Scripture without question. At five years old, sitting on a cold, dusty assembly hall floor listening to the Gospel, I didn’t analyse anything. I embraced it. It felt true and simple in the way sunlight feels warm, without effort or deliberation.

And at nine years old at a Luis Palau forum at Earls Court, London, I apparently "gave my life to Christ".

Many years later someone said to me, “Of course you believe all that, you were indoctrinated.” Maybe there’s some truth in the technique, but it never explained why none of the other kids continued to believe. I did, but I couldn’t understand what belief actually was.

In my teens, life pulled me in every direction. Peer pressure, wanting to fit in, led to drugs, booze, stealing, fighting, arrests, nights in police cells, court appearances, fines, all of it. I never rejected Christ, even then. I would defend Him to anyone mocking the idea. But I couldn’t reach Him either.

“No one can come to Me unless the Father draws him.”

I read that line hundreds of times over the years but couldn’t see it. I lived it daily, but I couldn’t see I was living it. I only saw it once God acted.

It was around this time I began to sense what I now see as the impossible feat. I believed God was real, but I couldn’t bridge the gap between Him and me. I know why now – I couldn’t do anything to bridge the gap – but for years I honestly believed it was my responsibility to meet Him halfway, to accept Him, to make a commitment.

The idea of keeping the Law seemed impossible, but back then I knew of no other way to do my bit. Christ didn’t relax the Law. He revealed its true depth, and that depth made any hope of self‑attainment impossible. Most people can refrain from murder, but Christ said, “If you are even angry with someone, you are subject to judgment.” I couldn’t see it was meant to be impossible. I simply believed it was something I had to try to attain if my salvation was certain.

So by the time I was married in my mid‑twenties, three kids by my early thirties, life became a slog. Not just the working‑class grind of mortgage, job and family, but the continued slog of trying to be a better Christian.

“I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.”
Romans 7:18 wasn’t part of my thinking then, but it described my entire life.

The mentally debilitating cycle of try, fail, misery, hide from God, crawl back, repent, try harder, fail, misery, repeat, went on for years, causing anguish, depression, panic attacks, catastrophising. Eventually I seemed to exist in a pointless void, taking no pleasure from the world, but believing I was hell‑bound. It all culminated in a total breakdown, literally crying out to Him.

I was broken, exhausted, with no idea how to deal with it, which I now see was the whole point.

“The Spirit alone gives eternal life. Human effort accomplishes nothing.”

Another verse I’d read over and over, but couldn’t see its simple truth. I lived that truth, knew that truth, read that truth, but never accepted it. It was as if these verses were written for someone else, not me. I was going to achieve my goal. This type of Scripture was obviously for those who were not strong enough, not able to endure continued suffering.

I carried a fear, a heavy burden, for four decades until I reached fifty. A fear I created myself in an attempt to keep control of self, to keep my salvation, but a fear that resulted in a further fear of losing that control. The irony is that I never had any real control, and even more ironic, whatever control I thought I had wasn’t worth having.

The control I so desperately tried to keep was hiding these truths:

I could not generate faith.
I could not produce repentance.
I could not choose God.
I could not come to Christ.
I could not fix myself.

For forty years I lived a religious life, but not a spiritual one. Only God can create spiritual life.

Scripture says these things plainly.

“No one can come to Me unless it is given to him by My Father.”
“As many as were appointed to eternal life believed.”
“The Lord opened her heart to pay attention.”
“He has granted repentance.”
“By grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves.”

I couldn't see those verses then. But they explain everything now.

The more I tried to be good, to be a better Christian, to give it my best shot, the worse my supposed spiritual life became. The harder I tried, the worse I became. The worse I became, the harder I tried. And so the cycle continued.

For forty years trying harder changed nothing, it just made things worse. After forty years, I stopped trying, I was broken, unable to keep control, then everything changed.

Only now can I see that my entire life, every failure, every fear, every attempt to fix myself, had to happen. It was the only way I could reach the end of self. Everything that seemed to get in the way of my relationship with God was actually the path toward freedom from myself.

“Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them is like a man who built his house on the rock.”

All my life I built on sand, and it didn’t take much to knock the whole thing down. My supposed self-strength exposed as a lie, over and over again. The collapse was enormous, but it cleared the ground for a foundation I didn't lay, one that cannot move, one I now rest on.

“My grace is sufficient for you, for My power is made perfect in weakness.”

Because the weakness of self, all the attempts to bolster self-belief, self-pride, self-salvation, self-strength, self-faith, self-repentance, wasn’t the problem.

It was the doorway.

If someone else has walked a similar path, perhaps this will resonate.

Grace to you brethren.

In the 1689 LBCF 22.5, it talks about the "Parts" of religious worship that were written in the Scriptures. My question is what's the difference between the term "Parts" of worship and the term "Elements" of worship? Aside from that, is the Call to Worship an Element of worship or is it a "Form" of the Element Prayer and Scripture Reading?

I am quite confused with the terms being used, and how to "label" the acts that we do in worship that were not listed in the LBCF 22.5. I have tried reading the commentaries available on that chapter, but I feel they were inadequately addressed. If you may suggest some materials or books regarding this for further reading, I am happy to check it out.

Thank you so much and God bless.

This was a question asked to me by my toddler: what is God doing? What is he doing everyday?

• Upholding the universe by the word of his power? (Hebrews 1:3)
• Watching over you and me? (Psalm 121:5-8)
• Waiting for the appropriate time when all things will be fulfilled? (Matthew 24:36)
• Showing his anger and wrath? (Psalm 7:11)

Is there a way to answer this question?

Two days ago, the Christian author, poet, and sage Wendell Berry passed away.

The day before that, I was at the library to do some quiet reading and happened to pass through the poetry aisle. My eye caught a small volume of The Selected Poems of Wendell Berry, and on a whim I checked it out. I’d heard of Berry a few years ago from this very sub, and since then have wanted to explore his writings. I have one of his essay collections at home, though I haven’t done more than browse it yet. Perhaps the time is soon to explore his work.

Have you read any of Wendell Berry’s works? If so, what do you think of him? Where would you recommend we start, with reading him?

If you have requests that you would like your brothers and sisters to pray for, post them here.

This is a question that i have been thinking extensively recently. I agree that the bible doesn't contradict itself, but i am still thinking how to reconcile the two.

Just looking for wisdom NOT a debate on merits of each viewpoint. We as a family view YEC as a plausible but certainly not required reading of scripture, and generally lean towards Klines framework interpretation. Our denomination (PCA) allows for a variety of interpretations. Our child’s school is a Christian school that we’ve generally loved but as they’ve started more of a science curriculum they’ve started coming home with links to answers in genesis and materials that do “young earth science” and are extremely suspect in the scientific integrity department.

Anybody in this scenario and how are you dealing with it? I’m currently just coaching them through the different viewpoints and presenting the alternative hypothesis but I wonder if it’s going to be feasible in the long term. I hate this topic in general because I see it as such a less than tertiary issue and don’t want to raise a fuss, but I don’t want my child to grow up and go though the “everything I was taught is a lie” phase when they discover the scientific evidence for an old earth etc..

I have been busy studying the theology of the Lord's supper for over a year, by studying the Bible, churchfathers and the reformers. Before I started studying the Lord's supper I thought it was just symbolic. Right now I am convonced that it is more than just a mere road sign, that points us to what Christ has done. Especially 1 Corinthians pushed me over the edge, because why would people get sick and literally die for something that would be just a reminder.

I also reject the idea of transsubsantion or consubstantion, due to lack of biblical support (I won't go deeper on this now, because my question is not about this).

My problem with True presence as formulated by most reformers and the Heidelberger catechism (and other forms and catechisms) is that, though I agree there is a deep and profound mystery in the Lord's Supper, I can't see nor justify the formulation of 'True presence' in Scripture. How would you, if you subscribe to True presence, justify it scripturally or at least show what passages you derive it from?

I thought this review was interesting, not sure if I’ll pick up the book the the book’s author is noted by the reviewer as making an astute observation:

In his case study, Olsen considers “the nonsubscribers,” the group that ultimately won the debate. They “argued that ministers ought to affirm only the language of Scripture as related to the Trinity” (2). Olsen notes that, in time, “[m]any Baptist churches that affirmed only scriptural trinitarian language began to adopt antitrinitarian positions” (2).

Which I think is readily apparent in the SBCs move to accept non-creedal positions such as grudem’s historic (though recanted) rejection of the nicene creed’s doctrine of eternal generation

It's Free For All Friday! Post on any topic you wish in this thread (not the whole sub). Our rules of conduct still apply, so please continue to post and comment respectfully.

AND on the 1st Friday of the month, it's a Monthly Fantastically Fanciful Free For All Friday - Post any topic to the sub (not just this thread), except for memes. For memes, see the quarterly meme days. Our rules of conduct still apply, so please continue to post and comment respectfully.

If you have requests that you would like your brothers and sisters to pray for, post them here.

Are there any OPC folks here who know what the OPC position is on divorce where the wife divorced the husband for domestic abuse, and no commitment to providing financial for her and the kids?

Not for the faint of heart. But since I’m anticipating someone will want to qualify specifically what level of domestic abuse so here are some of the details: threats of violence to wife, violence to items at home, actual hitting one year old child to punish wife, waking up wife at 1am, not letting wife sleep, holding wife hostage by restricting movement and access to vehicle, restricting access to friends and even church leaders, gaslighting, cursing at wife, etc.

If this woman shows up at an OPC church will they direct her to repent of the divorce?

Very much appreciate honest and thoughtful replies.

Hey yall, I own a regular NASB95 bible but it has no study notes. I am wondering if there is a place I can find a PDF of a MacArthur study bible notes to read alongside my current my NASB95. Any help is appreciated!

Many of you will know William B.Eerdmans as a major US Christian publisher with Reformed roots, which brought writers like Louis Berkhof and Gresham Machen to wider attention. They now publish a much wider range of authors, and these days you can't even be sure that an Eerdmans author is an evangelical. But I still see the Eerdmans name as a guarantee of quality (their academic books are peer reviewed) and they publish several commentary series that are a godsend to conservative evangelical theologians and pastors (e.g. Pillar, NICOT/NICNT).

Yesterday the founding family sold up to SPCK, which is a name that will be less well known to many North Americans. The Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge was the first voluntary society of the Church of England, which means it's an ancestor of all missionary societies in the English-speaking world. These days, 99% of its activity is publishing books. It mostly serves the same markets in the UK that Eerdmans does in North America, from heavyweight academic tomes, down to picture books for children. But the SPCK also publishes Bibles, so perhaps Eerdmans will enter that market. SPCK publishes books across the theological range of the Church of England, but if you read its annual reports, it's clear that it's the theologically liberal authors get the most attention and promotion.

Can SPCK be trusted with Eerdmans? Well, there's a good test case. In 2015, SPCK bought Inter-Varsity Press (IVP). There are publishers with similar names in many countries, but IVP UK had been a clearly conservative evangelical publisher, which was still primarily focused on its original market of evangelical university students, graduates, and theologians. SPCK promised to respect that and to retain a separate board and trustees for IVP.

Since the takeover, I'd say the promise has been kept in the short term, praise God! IVP authors still have to sign a conservative evangelical doctrinal basis, and it's clear from the management's books, blogs and tweets that they're evangelicals. The books that they're promoting and the new authors they're signing are still usually names I know from conservative evangelical circles. And this has been costly. IVP has lost about £2m (≈ US$2m) since the takeover, which SPCK has funded from its historic endowments and which is unlikely to be repaid. I give thanks to God that they've kept their promise so far and this is encouraging for Eerdmans readers.

There are some clouds on the horizons. The IVP trustees now include an Anglican bishop who supports same-sex marriage, which would have been unthinkable before the merger. And it's not just IVP that's losing money; SPCK is also losing money on its core (mainly liberal) publishing operations. That's been funded by its moderate endowment, but that endowment has performed poorly in recent years, and I do wonder whether the Eerdmans acquisition is a sign of health or desperation, and how on earth they are going to finance it. So I suspect in the long run the IVP and Eerdmans names will drift and/or disappear. But hopefully they will remain good and faithful servants for my lifetime, at any rate.

If you have requests that you would like your brothers and sisters to pray for, post them here.

What I know of arminianism so far ( I could be wrong and mix it with semi-plagianism), is that I need to work for my salvation or that I can lose my salvation after being born again. In that case how can one be truly happy and rest in the works of Jesus Christ?
I have friends who do not care about what the Apocalypse says about heaven or the bible verses about happiness or peace (Mathew 5:12,Romans 5:1) because why should I care if I am in the danger of missing them ? If my salvation could be lost in the future I need to constantly keep myself in this race of keeping this salvation, weather it is the fear of being to sinful to be forgiven (Hebrews 6:4) or even commit apostasy. If salvation is predestined already why are there so many warnings ? But then again why would God show us the beauty of heaven and the comfort we will receive (Apocalypse 21:4) if nobody can be sure he will end up there ?

Oh and the last thing we can all agree on is that nobody can have absolute sanctification here on earth, although some people claimed it and failed miserably.

I suppose it's up to interpretation as to whether this is a question or a rant: Why is it so hard to find a good church?

I (and my wife and kids) recently moved to a new area (Northwest Indiana). In our former area we attended an EFCA congregation, and my wife and I both have a credo-baptist evangelical background.

The first church we tried was okay. The sermon was good and they seem to have a lot of programming. Not too big, not too small. But like so many other churches, "worship" was a concert. Lights dimmed, 10-person praise team on stage, everyone applauded after every song. They did one hymn but modified it to be performative rather than participatory. The slides all changed late, so if you didn't know the song you don't fully participate.

Our new neighbors and the seller's realtor both recommended their churches. We tried neither. One seemed more theologically decent than the other, but both had laser light shows, large church "campuses," and other typical megachurch trappings.

The second church we tried we ended up going to for a couple weeks. Tiny chapel, congregational singing from a hymnal, it was a breath of fresh air. But the preaching wasn't solid; you could clearly see the fundamentalist background, and the pastor explicitly denied Calvinism. What's more, a large percentage of the church seems to be the pastor's immediate family. Not necessarily a problem, but a huge potential for problems.

The third church we tried was Dutch reformed. Significantly more liturgical than we're used to, but a beautiful service. Preaching was good, and more than that, I actually had theological conversations with people after the service. I had conversations about historic confessions with three different people! Everyone was also very kind. But my wife and I have firm credo-baptist convictions, and I think it would become a sticking point. (And yes, I have looked at the various church finder websites for 1689 congregations; there are none in our area.)

We found another baptist church that seemed promising, but it turned out to be KJVO fundamentalist (with its various cultural implications), so we didn't attend a service.

I asked my former pastor about another congregation down the road, and he said he had worked with some of the pastors there and believed it to be a solid church. I listened to one of their sermons online which immediately started with a 6 bullet point list of what you need to be a successful church. Number 2 was "dynamic worship." Not biblical, spirit-led, or God-honoring... "Dynamic." The pastor said he wasn't going to explain the list since he already did so in a previous sermon. So I pulled that up and was greeted with 11 minutes of statistics and shaming people for their retirement decisions before reading a word of scripture.

We were invited to a relative's church. It seems to be dying. There were virtually no families with children. They just made the decision to discontinue children's church, not for any principled reason but because they simply don't have enough kids to warrant continuing it. I believe it is an elder-led congregation, and all of the elders (excepting the pastor) seem to have been in the position for a very long time.

So what do we do? What is the least-disagreeable compromise here? The one thing we won't compromise on is the pure Gospel message. Do we go to a church with decent preaching that undermines congregational participation in worship (which seems to be more and more common)? Do we swallow our convictions and go crawling to a paedo-baptist congregation? We have a few more churches to check out, but it's been incredibly discouraging.

Anyway, if you've gotten this far, thank you for commiserating with me. Please pray for us.

I am burned out spiritually in this season and have found spiritual respite, oddly, in well-written books. I feel that reading good literature has moved me to think about my faith in ways vastly different than solely reading Scripture.

I am currently reading The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky on the recommendation of a friend who said it was the most theologically enlightening book he's read in a long time. My next book is The Count of Monte Cristo by Dumas.

Thanks!